IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  14 November 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130004855 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request for payment of an Officer Accession Bonus (OAB) in the amount of $10,000.00.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  His original Record of Proceedings states the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) application is required to be filed within 3 years of discovery of the error or injustice.  However, the final decision on his request for an exception to policy (ETP) to the National Guard Bureau (NGB) was not received until 4 March 2011 and he believes the 3 years should begin on that date, not the date he accepted his commission.  The miscommunication with the liaison at Fort Rucker, AL, was a nationwide issue which affected several officers within the Army National Guard (ARNG).  With that being said, the ETP process was drawn out while the leadership at NGB was determining what guidance to put out to the States.

	b.  He is providing five ABCMR Records of Proceedings involving warrant officers who were affected by the misunderstanding by the NGB liaison.  These warrant officers were also denied the opportunity by the staff and NGB liaison at Fort Rucker to contract for the OAB, but were granted relief by the ABCMR and have been paid their OAB's.

3.  The applicant provides copies of five ABCMR Records of Proceedings wherein relief was granted to five warrant officers requesting payment of OAB's.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20120000201 on 19 June 2012.

2.  He provides five ABCMR Records of Proceedings wherein the NGB denied ETP requests to allow these warrant officers to receive their $10,000.00 OAB's, but the ABCMR granted relief in each case.  In the referenced cases, the Board recommended correction of the records of these applicants – all listed in the ETP memorandum, dated 23 September 2010 – by paying them a portion of the bonus or the $10,000.00 bonus out of ARNG funds as a matter of equity.  The five ABCMR Records of Proceedings are new evidence that warrant consideration by the Board.

3.  Having prior enlisted service, the applicant was appointed as a warrant officer in the Kansas ARNG (KSARNG) and executed the oaths of office on 18 March 2008.

4.  He attended and successfully completed the UH-60 Pilot Course at Fort Rucker, AL, from 25 March 2008 to 2 December 2009.  He was promoted to chief warrant officer two on 22 May 2010.

5.  On 1 September 2010, the KSARNG submitted a request for an ETP to NGB to allow the applicant and eight other aviation officers to contract for an OAB as they were not afforded the opportunity to do so while at Fort Rucker, AL, through no fault of their own.

6.  On 23 September 2010, the Chief, Education, Incentives, and Employment Division, NGB, denied an ETP for the OAB for the applicant and eight warrant officers awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 153D.  The Education, Incentives, and Employment Division Chief stated:

	a.  The KSARNG's request for an ETP to allow the warrant officers to receive the $10,000.00 OAB could not be approved.  In accordance with the Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) Guidance for Fiscal Year (FY) 2007, 2008, 2009, 10 August 2007-31 March 2008 (Policy Number 07-06), dated 10 August 2007 and Education Incentives Operational Message 09-017, subject:  Continuation of Bonus Authorities to 28 February 2009, a $10,000.00 OAB for critical MOS 153D was offered at the time of the listed officers' oaths of office.  Upon review of all substantiating documentation, an incentive agreement was not executed and there was no request for a control number in the Information Management and Reporting Center (iMARC) prior to or at the time of their commissioning.  In accordance with the referenced policy, paragraph 8, retroactive entitlement to an incentive was not authorized.  Therefore, they did not meet all eligibility criteria and remained ineligible to receive an incentive or a bonus control number.

	b.  The military personnel officer should ensure that all elements responsible for incentive processing were properly trained.  That would preclude that issue from negatively affecting Soldiers in the future.

	c.  The warrant officers affected could file a claim with the ABCMR in accordance with Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) if they believed that an error or injustice still existed.

7.  On 14 January 2011, he requested an ETP for payment of the OAB.

8.  On 3 February 2011, he executed an OAB written agreement wherein he acknowledged that:

* he agreed to complete the necessary training within 36 months of appointment
* he agreed to serve in the Selected Reserve for 6 years
* he would be paid a $10,000.00 bonus in two 50-percent installments – the first 50-percent installment payable upon successful completion of an officer basic course/warrant officer basic course (WOBC) and the second and final installment payable on the third-year anniversary of his commission/appointment

9.  In a memorandum, dated 4 February 2011, the KSARNG Incentive Manager stated:

	a.  The aviation officers listed in the memorandum, dated 23 September 2010, attended the warrant officer candidate school (WOCS) at Fort Rucker, AL, and then continued on to Aviation School on continuous active duty orders.  Instructions given to the candidates were that the NGB Liaison would process the OAB control number request through iMARC.  Once they completed WOCS and accepted their commissions, they would be provided the OAB addendum for signature at Fort Rucker.  When they reached that point, Fort Rucker personnel advised them that they would sign the addendum when they returned to their State of assignment.

	b.  Once they returned to Kansas they were identified as potential issues and their names were not on the initial list of OAB's that NGB sent for manual upload into iMARC.  Since they were not identified by the officer recruiter at the time the original list came from NGB, the education office was not aware of the issues with the bonuses for these individuals.

	c.  To ensure that future candidates do not have the same issue, the officer recruiting section has been instructed to request a control number prior to shipping the warrant officer candidates to school.  The State Incentive Manager will be provided an email address and/or telephone number to stay in contact with the respective candidates to ensure the OAB addendum is signed on the date of commissioning and that iMARC is properly updated.

10.  On 9 February 2011, the KSARNG G-1 and the Kansas Adjutant General recommended approval of the ETP request.  They indicated the applicant was incorrectly advised on the administrative procedure to be granted the OAB and he should not be penalized.

11.  On 4 March 2011, the Chief, Education, Incentives, and Employment Division, NGB, returned the request without action.  The Education, Incentives, and Employment Division Chief stated a previous request had been submitted and it was determined that the applicant was ineligible for the OAB; however, the applicant had the option to file a claim with the ABCMR.

12.  ARNG SRIP Policy Guide for FY07, 08, and 09 stated, in part, retroactive entitlement to an incentive offered under this policy is not authorized.  To qualify for an OAB the officer must sign the OAB addendum on the date he or she accepts his or her commission as a second lieutenant or appointment as a warrant officer.

13.  Title 37, U.S. Code, section 308j (Affiliation Bonus for Officers in the Selected Reserve), states the Secretary concerned may pay an accession bonus under this section to an eligible person who enters into an agreement with the Secretary to accept an appointment as an officer in the Armed Forces and to serve in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve in a skill designated under paragraph (2) for a period specified in the agreement.  Subparagraph f states a person may not receive an affiliation bonus or accession bonus under this section and financial assistance under Title 10, U.S. Code, chapter 1608, 1609, or 1611, or under section 302g of this title for the same period of service.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant completed WOCS and he was appointed as a warrant officer in the KSARNG effective 18 March 2008.  He also completed the UH-60 Pilot Course in December 2009.  He states he was promised the OAB upon completion of the WOCS, but he never received it.  On 23 September 2010, NGB denied the applicant and eight other warrant officers' request for an ETP to receive the OAB.

2.  In a memorandum, dated 4 February 2011, the KSARNG Incentive Manager stated the applicant and the eight other warrant officers were advised that once they completed WOCS and accepted their commissions, they would be provided the OAB addendum for signature.  When they reached that point they were advised by personnel officials that they would sign the addendum when they reached their State of assignment.

3.  The NGB G-1, KSARNG Adjutant General, and State Incentive Manager confirmed the applicant was incorrectly advised of the requirement to sign an OAB addendum on his commissioning date in accordance with NGB policy and he should not be penalized.

4.  The applicant's reference to other ABCMR cases wherein relief was granted to five of the warrant officers listed in the memorandum, dated 23 September 2010, is acknowledged.

5.  The applicant completed WOCS as well as his third anniversary of appointment; therefore, he should be paid the full bonus.

6.  It is evident that errors were committed in the processing of the applicant's commissioning and entitlement to an OAB which were acknowledged by the KSARNG.  He was fully qualified for the OAB when appointed and then was improperly administered the OAB agreement through no fault of his own.  He should not be penalized by administrative errors committed.  As matter of equity in this case, he is therefore entitled to payment of the entire bonus in the amount of $10,000.00.

BOARD VOTE:

____X____  ___X_____  ____X____  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION



BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant amendment of the ABCMR's decision in Docket Number AR20120000201, dated 19 June 2012.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army and State ARNG records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

* showing he qualified for a $10,000.00 Selected Reserve OAB at the time of his 19 March 2008 appointment in the KSARNG and the OAB Written Agreement was completed properly and in a timely manner
* showing he is entitled to payment of the entire amount of $10,000.00 bonus for which he signed
* paying him the entire bonus in the amount of $10,000.00 out of ARNG funds as specified in his OAB Written Agreement



      ___________X______________
                 CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130004855



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130004855



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1