IN THE CASE OF:    

		BOARD DATE:  22 October 2014	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140014069 


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 to overturn the denial by the National Guard Bureau (NGB) of his exception to policy (ETP) request to receive the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP) incentive.

2.  The applicant states he exceeded the 13-year time in service (TIS) SLRP extension period by 3 days, through no fault of his own.  The fault lies with the Colorado Army National Guard (COARNG) Recruitment and Retention Office, his unit administrator (UA), and the State Incentive Office.  The Recruitment and Retention Office disseminated incorrect information and his UA and the State Incentive Office failed to process his extension in a timely manner.  

3.  The applicant provides:

* index of attachments
* correspondence with his unit S-1, UA, and G-1, dated from 13 March 2014 to 27 May 2014
* screen shot of SLRP checklist, dated 10 May 2014
* SLRP eligibility checklist, undated
* memoranda requesting ETP, dated 29 May 2014
* DA Form 4836 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment or Reenlistment), dated 
7 June 2014
* narrative and time line, dated 17 June 2014
* memorandum from the NGB denying the ETP for the SLRP, dated 
26 June 2014
* memorandum from the SLRP processing noncommissioned officer (NCO), dated 18 July 2014

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s record contains a DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document - Armed Forces of the United States) showing he enlisted in the Delayed Entry Program (DEP) on 23 August 1996.  He was discharged from the DEP and enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 August 1997.

2.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was honorably released from active duty upon completion of required active service on 18 August 2000 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve, Control Group (Reinforcement).  His Reserve obligation termination date was listed as 22 August 2004.  

3.  His record contains a DD Form 4 showing he enlisted in the COARNG on 
9 September 2008 for a period of 6 years.

4.  His record contains a DA Form 4836, dated 7 June 2014.  This form shows:

* his basic pay entry date (PEBD) as 5 September 2001
* his current expiration term of service (ETS) date as 8 September 2014
* his period of extension as 6 years
* his new ETS date as 8 September 2020
* the authority and reason for his extension as NGB-ARH Policy Number 09-026, table 1, rule F(5), meaning his extension was for the SLRP incentive
* this document was signed and dated on 7 June 2014

5.  His record does not contain an SLRP addendum.

6.  The applicant provided a narrative and time line, various email and text message transmissions, screenshots and documents from the COARNG SharePoint site, and several memoranda.  These documents are dated from 
15 September 2013 to 18 July 2014 and show:

	a.  He tried to extend his enlistment with the SLRP incentive on 
15 September 2013, but was not qualified at the time because he was not military occupational specialty qualified (MOSQ) for the slot he held.  He became MOSQ on 19 March 2014 and began working towards his request in earnest.  

	b.  On 20 March 2014, he conversed with sergeant (SGT) LEM (Brigade S-1) and SGT AGM, the UA; however, both SGTs indicated they knew little about the SLRP process and would need to seek assistance from the G-1 to complete his request.  

	c.  SGT LEM acquired the SLRP eligibility documents from the SharePoint site.  These documents stated he must have less than 14 years of service to be eligible for the SLRP incentive upon his extension.  Additionally SGT LEM indicated the documents he would need to provide to her so she could initiate an SLRP addendum.  He provided these documents.

	d.  He was under the impression that SGT LEM and SGT AGM were, as they stated, waiting to hear back from the G-1 about his SLRP.  He tried to stay in contact with them via cell phone, office phone and via text messages but they ignored his calls and did not respond.  Eventually he saw SGT LEM at the Joint Forces Headquarters.  When they spoke, she informed him that she was directed not to assist him any further with the SLRP or his extension because it was not in her lane.

	e.  On 9 May 2014, he began working only with his UA on the extension and with SGT KJD, who was the SLRP representative.  SGT KJD entered in all of his data into the SLRP system and that SGT LEM and SGT AGM began working on his extension contract and SLRP addendum.

	f.  He went back and forth with SGT AGM about his contract because he noted it contained several errors.  However, during the period he was working with the UA, she informed him she was able to provide his extension contract but not the SLRP addendum because she had discovered he must have less than 
13 years of service at the time of his contract start date vice the less than 
14 years of service listed on the COARNG SharePoint documents.

	g.  His company commander and his G-1 sent memoranda to the NGB in May 2014, to request an ETP to allow him to accept the SLRP even though he would have 13 years and 3 days on the day the contract officially started.  They also mentioned that the COARNG had provided misinformation to the applicant by stating he needed less than 14 years.  

	h.  He was informed he may not be able to extend for the SLRP but had decided he would extend whether or not he received the incentive, and he signed his extension contract on 7 June 2014.

	i.  The NGB denied the applicant’s request for an ETP on 26 June 2014.

	j.  SGT KDJ sent several email to personnel in the retention office and those who managed the SharePoint site in July 2014.  She pointed out the errors in SharePoint in an attempt to correct the problem.

7.  The NGB issued Policy Number 13-01, entitled "The ARNG Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) Policy for Fiscal Year 2013 (FY13), Effective 1 January 2013 through 30 September 2013," on 29 November 2012.  Paragraph 17a(10) for this policy states a current ARNG member is eligible for the SLRP incentive only if he or she extends within 365-91 days of his or her ETS for a minimum term of 6 years and he or she is duty MOSQ as the primary position holder, not in an overstrength or excess status.  Additionally, the Soldier must have less than 13 years TIS at the time of current ETS.  This service is computed from the Soldier's adjusted PEBD.  The "total military service criteria" includes inactive reserve time.  The TIS is based on the contract start date, not the signature date.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  When the applicant enlisted in the COARNG on 9 September 2008 his PEBD was adjusted to 5 September 2001 to account for his previous military service.

2.  His enlistment in the COARNG, on 9 September 2008, was for a period of 
6 years, as such his ETS date was 8 September 2014.  Therefore, when he extended this enlistment on 7 June 2014 by 6 years, the start date of his contract became 9 September 2014, the day after his current ETS date.  

3.  The FY13 SRIP policy guidance, in effect at the time of his extension, stated an ARNG Soldier must have less than 13 years TIS on the contract start date, not the signature date.  Based on his PEBD on 5 September 2001, he had more than 
13 year TIS on the contract start date.

4.  The evidence he provided shows two things.  First, the applicant was initially informed that he had shown he needed less than 14 years TIS.  Second, he was informed he did not qualify and may not be able to receive the SLRP incentive before he signed his extension contract; however, he decided to sign it in hopes that an ETP may be approved.  

5.  Based on the foregoing, there is insufficient evidence to grant the requested relief.






BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X___  ____X___  ____X___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20140014069





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140014069



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1