IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  16 October 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130022268 


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, in effect, correction of his record to show he qualified and reenlisted for repayment of his student loans under the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP).

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  When he enlisted in the North Dakota Army National Guard (NDARNG) in February 2010, he was promised by the Army recruiter that he would receive SLRP benefits for his outstanding student loans.

	b.  The SLRP benefit was a deciding factor in his reenlisting in the Guard at that time.

	c.  To qualify for the benefit, he needed to be military occupational specialty qualified (MOSQ).

	d.  Upon assignment to his unit in Bismarck, North Dakota as a 15V (Observation/Scout Helicopter Repairer), he made it clear that he would be 100 percent available for the first course that could be found for him to attend.

	e.  He was not offered a slot until October 2012, or almost 3 years after he enlisted.

	f.  He has prior service in the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) and he held MOS 6114 (Helicopter Mechanic), but unfortunately his extensive experience as a mechanic/inspector/plan captain/front seat test mechanic did not qualify him to get an Army MOS, or get enrolled in a reclassification course.

	g.  In the end, he was sent to the full-blown advanced individual training (AIT) course at Fort Eustis, Virginia in October 2012.

	h.  Had he been the cause of not being MOSQ in a timely manner he would fully understand why his SLRP benefit was terminated.

	i.  He repeatedly sought a school date and he was never given the opportunity to turn down a school.  Therefore, he accepted the only school he was offered, almost 3 years after his enlistment.

	j.  He believes he has earned the SLRP benefit he was promised as he has served his country for over 10 years.

3.  The applicant provides:

* Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1-112th Aviation Battalion (S&S) Memorandum for Record dated 7 December 2013
* UH-60 Repairer Training Record
* Marine Corps MOS List, Joint School List, and Marine Corps Schools (Conducted by the Army) List
* Email between NDARNG Officials
* Request for Exception to Policy (ETP) denial dated 24 October 2013
* Notification of ETP decision dated 25 October 2013

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  With prior enlisted service in the USMC, the applicant enlisted in the NDARNG for 6 years on 23 February 2010.  At the time of his enlistment, he completed a National Guard Bureau (NGB) 21 (Annex A – DD Form 4, Enlistment/Reenlistment Agreement – Army National Guard) acknowledging that he understood he would undergo training in MOS 15V.

2.  On 7 December 2013, the NDARNG Assistant Training Officer prepared a Memorandum for Record stating:

	a.  The applicant was placed in A Company, 1-112th Aviation Battalion on 22 February 2013 as a prior service Marine.

	b.  The recruiter who brought him in cited that "we" needed to apply for an MOS equivalency to award him an Army MOS.

	c.  After approximately 5 months the personnel branch determined that he did not have a Marine skill that could be applied to an Army MOS.  Once the determination was received, an MOS-producing training course was sought.

	d.  The Army discontinued the 15V AIT as the OH-58 was being decommissioned.

	e.  He was scheduled to attend a flight operations MOS school as an interim path to get him MOSQ but he was unable to be placed in a 15T AIT until the manning document changed his duty position to reflect the replacement aircraft.

	f.  He completed all prerequisite training but was denied attendance to the course because the school determined he did not hold an Army MOS prior to attendance.

	g.  An AIT 15T quota for Fiscal Year 2013 was secured and he completed the required training and was awarded the 15T MOS.

	h.  The applicant was prepared and willing to attend any training that could be provided, but due to a change in his unit structure and the lack of available MOS producing schools he was unable to attain an Army MOS.

3.  In an NGB Memorandum dated 24 October 2013, the North Dakota State Incentive Manager was notified that the applicant's request for an ETP to retain the $50,000.00 SLRP benefit was denied.  The NGB stated he is not duty MOSQ for the contracted incentive which violates ARNG Chaplain, Health Professional and Enlisted Loan Repayment Program (CHELRP) Fiscal Year 2009 and his incentive addendum cannot be found.  The NGB stated that the applicant's current MOS is 15T (UH-60 Helicopter Repairer).

4.  In an NDARNG Memorandum dated 25 October 2013, the applicant was notified that his request to retain the SLRP benefit was denied by the NGB.  He was told that as per the ETP decision from NGB the SLRP is to be terminated and that the amount to be recouped equals $2,013.57.

5.  A review of the applicant's Official Military Personnel File fails to show an incentive addendum contained therein.  The applicant does not provide a copy of the incentive addendum.

6.  The applicant provides a copy of his UH-60 Training Record and a list of Marine Corps MOS's, Joint Schools, and Marine Corps Schools conducted by the Army.  He also provides email between NDARNG officials showing the attempts to get a clear explanation and direction for getting MOSQ.

7.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) prescribes eligibility criteria governing the enlistment of persons, with or without prior service, into the Regular Army, U.S. Army Reserve, and ARNG.

8.  Army Regulation 601-210, chapter 6, section II, contains guidance for the guidance counselor processing phase.  It states that guidance counselors will verify the applicants' eligibility for enlistment and counsel applicants who failed to meet specific qualification for MOS, options, and assignments for which they applied and advise them of all other available options that would still meet the applicants' needs, wants, and desires, as well at the needs of the Army.

9.  Army Regulation 135-7 (Incentive Programs) restricts the SLRP to those Reserve Soldiers who either enlist or reenlist for a skill or unit approved by the Department of the Army and disseminated to the field by a list of MOS's and units which is updated on a periodic basis.  This educational incentive may only be elected at the time of enlistment or reenlistment.  This incentive pays a limited sum of money to a lending institution on the anniversary date of an enlistment or reenlistment.  These payments continue on a yearly basis unless the Soldier loses eligibility by no longer serving in the approved MOS or unit.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request for correction of his records to show he is eligible for the SLRP as stated in his enlistment contract has been carefully considered.

2.  By law, the Secretary concerned may authorize the SLRP to eligible Soldiers in conjunction with enlistment/reenlistment in the Selected Reserve.  The law allows the Secretary concerned the latitude in establishing the criteria and eligibility for the SLRP.  The governing regulation stipulates that guidance counselors are required to verify the applicants' eligibility for enlistment and counsel applicants who failed to meet specific qualifications for MOS, options, and assignments, for which they applied and advise them of all other available options that would still meet the applicants' needs, wants, and desires as well as the needs of the Army.

3.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant entered into an enlistment contract on 23 February 2010 that appears to have included authorization for SLRP benefits in good faith; however, through no fault of his own, the loan was later discovered to be ineligible under the SLRP.   

4.  Although the incentive addendum cannot be found based on the available evidence, there is no error in the Army's decision to terminate him from the SLRP.  He was not MOSQ for enlistment under the SLRP at the time of his enlistment in the NDARNG.

5.  However, considering his attempts to become MOSQ and the fact that he has already started receiving SLRP benefits, it is reasonable to presume that he was misinformed and that he believed he was qualified to reenlist under the SLRP.  It would be inequitable to recoup the $2,013.57 he has already received and to now deny him benefits under the SLRP.

BOARD VOTE:

____X____  ___X_____  __X______  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army and State Army National Guard records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  showing that the NGB approved an ETP to qualify him for repayment of all his student loans under the SLRP at the time of his enlistment in the NDARNG payable out of ARNG funds; and

	b.  not recouping the $2,013.57 in SLRP benefits he has already received.




      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20130022268



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130022268



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1