IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  29 July 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140010411 


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, reinstatement of eligibility and payment of her college loans under the terms of the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP).

2.  The applicant states she has been denied her 2012 payment under the SLRP based on a determination by National Guard Bureau (NGB) officials that:

* the SLRP incentive was not obtained at the time of her extension
* administrative errors regarding the contract not being dated by the:

* service representative
* witnessing official

* she became a Military Technician after the contract date

   a.  She states that in May 2010 she was participating in the South Carolina Army National Guard (SCARNG), Officer Candidate School (OCS) program.  
She was informed she would have to reenlist because her remaining service obligation was not sufficient to complete the program.  She was also informed that she could contract for the SLRP at the time of her reenlistment.  She completed her reenlistment contract and, on the same date, went to the Education Office and completed the SLRP addendum.

   b.  She states that she properly signed and dated the contract on 10 May 2010.  The service representative and witnessing official signed the contract; however, she wasn't aware that they failed to enter the date on the contract.  
She also didn't notice that the SLRP addendum was a 2 November 2010 edition of the form.

   c.  She states that she trusted the subject matter experts (SME) involved in the process to ensure the proper forms and procedures were followed.  The fact that the SMEs requested an SLRP Bonus Control Number (BCN) after the date of her extension was beyond her control.  She also states that she accepted the Military Technician position on 14 July 2013, which was well after contracting for the SLRP incentive.  She acknowledges that she understood that she would no longer be eligible for the SLRP incentive once she obtained the Military Technician position.

   d.  In August 2011, at the completion of OCS, she was offered the opportunity to take a $10,000 bonus or keep her SLRP.  She decided to maintain the SLRP incentive because it was more beneficial (i.e., $50,000.00 versus $10,000.00). She does not understand how the NGB official can state that, "Although [applicant] may have been eligible to contract for SLRP, the Department of the Army (DA) Form 4836 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment or Reenlistment) does not indicate an incentive being offered."

   e.  She states she received the 2011 annual payment under this SLRP contract in 2012.  Now, due to administrative errors by SME officials in the SCARNG, she is being denied thousands of dollars toward payment of her educational debt.

3.  The applicant provides copies of her:

* DA Form 4836
* NGB Form 600-7-5-R-E (Annex L to DD Form 4 - SLRP Addendum - ARNG)
* SCARNG, Orders 147-840, dated 27 May 2010
* Notification of Selection and Notification of Personnel Action
* NGB memorandum, dated 10 March 2014

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant had prior honorable active duty enlisted service in the U.S. Air Force from 19 August 1992 through 18 August 1996.

2.  The applicant's DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document - Armed Forces of the United States) shows she enlisted in the Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and SCARNG on 18 November 2006 for a period of 1 year.  Three DA Forms 4836, dated 8 November 2007, 2 November 2008, and 13 January 2009, show she extended her enlistment to a period of 3 years and 6 months with a new expiration term of service (ETS) date of 17 May 2010.

3.  A DA Form 4836, dated 14 May 2010, shows she extended the period of her enlistment for a period of 6 years and established her new ETS date as 17 May 2016.

   a.  Item 9 (Authority and Reason for this Extension) shows, "Table 1 (Authorized Periods of Extension), Rule A (Applies to Soldiers fully eligible, including those with approved waivers of disqualification; periods of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 years), NGB-ARH Policy Number 09-026 (Interim Policy for Extension, Immediate Reenlistment, and Bar to Reenlistment/Immediate Reenlistment/ Extension), dated 13 August 2009.

   b.  The applicant and Major Alison H----- H---- (Certifying Officer) placed their signatures on the document.

   c.  A review of the document failed to reveal a reference to the SLRP.

4.  An NGB Form 600-7-5-R-E, pertaining to the applicant, provides the obligation and participation requirements for entitlement under the SLRP and also occasions that are a basis for suspension or termination.

   a.  It shows in the header of the form (all 4 pages), the applicant's name and "BCN:  S110100045C."

   b.  A review of the SLRP Addendum shows that:

	 	(1)  the applicant indicated she had five existing loans and that the total amount that may be repaid on all loans may not exceed $50,000.00;

	 	(2)  loans must be one year old or older on the first anniversary eligibility date to qualify for this program;

	 	(3)  the portion that may be repaid annually on any qualifying loan(s) will not exceed 15 percent (not to exceed $7,500.00 per year) of the total of all loans or $500.00, whichever is greater.  Payment will be processed on the anniversary date of the enlistment/reenlistment/extension for each satisfactory year of service; and
	 	(4)  SLRP eligibility will be terminated one day prior to the effective start date of a permanent or indefinite position in the Military Technician program, or temporary technician position of 180 days or more.

   c.  Section IX (Statement of Understanding) shows, in pertinent part, "I also understand that my continued participation on this program will cause me to be ineligible for any Officer/Warrant Officer Accession Bonus."
   
   d.  Section X (Authentication) shows the applicant placed her signature on the form and entered the date "14 May 2010."

   e.  Section XI (Certification by Service Representative) shows the following individuals signed the form, but did not enter the date:

* Sergeant First Class Paul J. M----, Service Representative
* Major Alison H. H----, Witnessing Officer

   f.  The footer of the form (all 4 pages) shows "NGB Form 600-7-5-R-E, Previous Editions are Obsolete, 2 November 2010."

5.  An NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows the applicant was honorably discharged from the ARNGUS and SCARNG on 
12 August 2011 to accept appointment as a commissioned officer.  

6.  She was appointed as a Reserve commissioned in the ARNG with the rank of second lieutenant on 13 August 2011.

7.  A DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows the applicant was ordered to active duty for training (ADT) on 6 November 2011 and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 92A (Quartermaster, General).  It also shows she was honorably released from ADT on 9 March 2012 and transferred to an SCARNG unit.

8.  In support of her application the applicant provides the following documents:

	a.  State of South Carolina, Military Department, Office of the Adjutant General, Columbia, SC, Orders 147-840, dated 27 May 2010, that attached the applicant to 2nd Battalion, Eastover, SC, effective 20 May 2010.

   b.  State of South Carolina, Military Department, Office of the Adjutant General, Columbia, SC, memorandum, dated 3 July 2013, subject:  Notice of Selection - Position Number 13-244, and Standard Form 50-B (Notification of Personnel Action), that show the applicant was selected and received an excepted appointment for the GS-0260-09 Equal Opportunity Specialist position at J1-EEO, effective 14 July 2013.

	c.  A memorandum issued by the Deputy G1, ARNG, NGB, Arlington, VA, dated 10 March 2014, subject:  Request for Exception to Policy (ETP) for SLRP, that shows the applicant's request to retain the $50,000.00 SLRP was denied because she did not contract for the incentive at the time of extension.

    	(1)  The NGB official noted that the applicant's SLRP contract violates the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009, ARNG - Chaplain, Health Profession, and Enlisted Loan Repayment Program (CHELRP) because:

* she became a Military Technician after the contract start date
* the addendum is missing signature dates from the Service Representative and Witnessing Officer
* the BCN was requested after the date of extension

    	(2)  The NGB official concluded that, remaining consistent within NGB review guidelines, the applicant's request for ETP cannot be granted.

    	(3)  Accordingly, the State Incentive Manager was instructed to terminate the applicant's SLRP incentive with recoupment effective the date of the associated extension (14 May 2010).

9.  Army Regulation 135-7 (Incentive Programs), in pertinent part, restricts the SLRP to those Reservists who either enlist or reenlist for a skill or unit approved by DA and disseminated to the field by a list of MOSs and units, which is updated every 6 months.  This educational incentive may only be elected at the time of enlistment or reenlistment.

	a.  Each complete satisfactory year of service performed under this SLRP agreement establishes an anniversary date.  Any qualifying loan which is at least a year old may then be paid in accordance with the terms of this educational enlistment incentive.

	b.  The 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that her SLRP eligibility should be reinstated and she should receive the 2012 annual payment of the SLRP she contracted for because she completed her reenlistment contract, along with the SLRP Addendum, on 14 May 2010, but errors by SCARNG SMEs (i.e., the date was not entered after their signatures, incorrect edition of form, and untimely processing of a BCN) caused the NGB to declare her SLRP contract incentive invalid.

2.  Records show the applicant extended her enlistment in the SCARNG on 
14 May 2010 for a period of 6 years.  The DA Form 4836 she signed on 14 May 2010 did not include an authority/authorization for the SLRP incentive.

   a.  The NGB Form 600-7-5-R-E that the applicant signed (on 14 May 2010) was a 2 November 2010 edition of the form.  It is unlikely that this edition of the form would have been available for use in the field almost 6 months prior to its implementation date.  Nonetheless, even if the form was available in the field, it is reasonable to conclude that SMEs would not begin utilizing the new edition of the form before the implementation date.

   b.  A review of the SLRP Addendum by NGB officials determined that the addendum is missing signature dates from the Service Representative and Witnessing Officer, and the BCN was requested after the date of the extension.

   c.  The applicant provides no official documentary evidence to support her contention that the Service Representative and Witnessing Official placed their signatures on the SLRP Addendum on the same date (i.e., 14 May 2010) as the applicant indicates that she signed the form.  She also does not provide any supporting document(s) from the Service Representative in support of her application regarding the SLRP incentive (i.e., BCN and SLRP Addendum).

3.  The evidence of record does not support the conclusion that the applicant timely executed a valid SLRP Addendum for the SLRP incentive.  Thus, based on the available evidence, there does not appear to be an error in this case. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

4.  Records show the applicant acknowledged that SLRP eligibility would be terminated one day prior to the date she accepted a Military Technician position.
She was appointed to a Military Technician position effective 14 July 2013.  If the applicant had a valid SLRP contract, it would have been terminated on 13 July 2013.  Thus, she would have been eligible for the 2012 annual 15 percent SLRP payment and it would have been the last authorized SLRP annual payment. Therefore, the statement by the NGB official, that the applicant became a Military Technician after the (extension) contract start date, which violates ARNG CHELRP FY 2009, is accurate because ARNG policy would require termination of the SLRP contract (if it were valid).

5.  The SLRP Addendum shows the applicant had five existing loans that originated prior to 14 May 2010 and the portion that may be repaid annually on any qualifying loan will not exceed 15 percent (not to exceed $7,500.00 per year) of the total of all loans or $500.00, whichever is greater.

6.  The evidence of record shows the applicant decided to maintain the SLRP incentive in lieu of an officer accession/affiliation bonus because it would be more beneficial to her financially.

7.  Therefore, as a matter of equity, it would be appropriate to authorize the applicant to retain any funds that may have been paid as part of the 2011 annual SLRP payment; thereby forgiving any debt the applicant may owe the United States Government as a result of this decision.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___x____  ____x___  ____x___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial 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 issuing a memorandum as an addendum to her
NGB Form 600-7-5-R-E (Annex L to DD Form 4) authorizing the applicant to retain any funds that she may have received as part of the 2011 annual Student Loan Repayment Program incentive; thereby forgiving any debt the applicant may owe the United States Government as a result of this decision pertaining to an invalid contact for the Student Loan Repayment Program incentive.


2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to validating and reinstating the Student Loan Repayment Program incentive as part of her extension contract.  



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20140010411



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140010411



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1