DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
MEH
Docket No. 9961-08
22 Dec 08
From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
LOx Secretary of the Navy
Subj}: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO_
Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments
(2) Navy Dental Corps memo
(3) Subject’s naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject,
hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with
this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval
record be corrected to show an Active Duty Service Obligation
(ADSO) of 3 years ending in June 2009.
2. The Board, consisting of Messrs. George, Pfeiffer, and
Zsalman, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and
injustice on 15 December 2008 and, pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the corrective action indicated below should be
taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material
considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval
records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record
pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice,
finds as follows:
a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all
administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b. On 19 February 2004 Petitioner signed an Armed Forces
Health Professions Scholarship Program (AFHPSP) contract, which
would allow him to pursue full-time studies in dentistry at a
civilian educational institution accredited by the American
Dental Association.
c. Paragraph 7a of his AFHPSP contract specified that in
return for 2 years of general civilian dental training he would
incur a 3 year ADSO, to begin upon completion of the civilian
training.
a. Paragraph 8c of the contract provided that if
Petitioner was later selected for Advanced Education in General
Dentistry (AEGD) (a military residency type program), he would
“not discharge any portion of (his) ADSO during this training.”
e. In August 2005, Petitioner indicated that he desired to
be considered for participation in the AEGD. He was accepted
for the program with training to commence after graduation from
AFHSP in May 2006.
f. In early May 2006, prior to commencing AEGD training,
Petitioner spoke and corresponded with his detailer, QU:
<—mlilili, xcegarding what his active duty obligation would be if
he accepted the AEGD training. CaS 2cconecusly
advised Petitioner that his active duty obligation would be 30
years (from his commencing active duty) whether he accepted or
declined the AEGD. In particular, @xQgQepep responded in
an e-mail dated 4 May 2006 that “the AEGD program will not be a
neutral year for you. Your active duty obligation is 3
years..AEGD or not! I strongly recommend you stay in the program
and not decline.” (A “neutral” year would not count towards
fulfilling the 3 year active service obligation).
g. ail mal advice was erroneous because it
conflicted directly with paragraph 8c of Petitioner’s AFHSP
contract which stated that Petitioner would “not discharge any
portion of (his) ADSO during” AEGD training. tt
gave this advice without reviewing/examining the specifics of
Petitioner’s AFHSP contract. Notably, before 2004 (the year in
which when Petitioner signed his AFHSP contract) and indeed even
during part of 2004, the “standard” AFHSP contract allowed
training in the AEGD program to count towards fulfilling the 3
year active duty obligation. However, Petitioner’s contract
unambiguously prohibited crediting of the time in training in
the AEGD program towards fulfilling the 3 year active duty
obligation.
h. In reliance on NNN advice, Petitioner
accepted and attended the AEGD training and completed the
training in August 2007. He is currently assigned as a Dental
Officer at Camp Lejeune, NC. When recently preparing to submit
his resignation papers he was informed his ADSO was recorded as
August 2010 (i.e. 3 years after completion of the AEGD training
per his AFHSP contract) vice June 2009 (i.e. 3 years after he
accepted his active duty appointment per (ai
advice and e-mail).
i. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), the office
having cognizance over the subject matter addressed -in
Petitioner’s application has recommended the request be denied,
noting that paragraph 8c of his AFHPSP contact clearly states,
in reference to AEGD residency, “I will not discharge any
portion of my ADSO during this training. In effect, the AEGD
shall be a neutral year with regard to any ADSO incurred.” The
opinion concluded his contract was a legal document that
superseded both the conversation and e-mail between Petitioner
and his detailer.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record,
notwithstanding the comments contained in enclosure (2), the
Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable
action. The Board gave due consideration to the comments made
in enclosure (2). However, because Petitioner was a newly
commissioned dental officer the Board was of the opinion it was
not unreasonable for Petitioner to accept and rely on the
information given by his more experienced 06 detailer.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected, where appropriate,
to show that:
a. His ADSO expires in June 2009, 3 years after he
accepted his active duty appointment.
4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the
Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that quorum was
present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the
foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's
proceedings in the above entitled matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN WILLIAM J. HESS, IIT
Recorder Acting Recorder
5s The foregoing action of the Board is submitted for your
review and action.
\ Spon
W. DEAN PFET RF
Executive D Cc
Reviewed and Approved
crc
Qe x’. C&L
Vi-St- 08
RobertT.Call 4
Assistant General Counsel ‘
Manpower and Reserve )
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057374C070420
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her active duty service obligation (ADSO) be changed from 6 years, 11 months, and 12 days, to 4 years. APPLICANT STATES : She accepted a 4 year ROTC (Reserve Officer Training Corps) scholarship incurring an 8 year military service obligation; 4 years on active duty and 4 years in the Army Reserve. I may not serve all or any part of the active duty obligation incurred by participation in this program concurrently with any other military obligation.” It also stated...
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2006-00118
The applicant would not have become an officer if she had known that the Air Force would not accommodate her religious beliefs. was discharged from the Air Force. The Air Force could have waived COT for the petitioner and accommodated her religious requirements as an Air Force dentist.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060008759
The applicant requests his active duty service obligation (ADSO) date be corrected from 10 April 2009 to 30 September 2006. Incentive Special Pay (ISP) is paid annually and is currently authorized for all Army Medical Corps specialties. The advisory opinion suggested three options for the applicant: (1) accept the current 4-year medical specialty pay agreements and the 10 April 2009 ADSO, (2) accept the current 4-year medical specialty pay agreements and the 10 April 2009 ADSO and, at the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015953
The applicant provides his approved 2-year CSRB contract dated 1 October 2007, and a message, date/time group 082130Z Sep 06, Subject: Critical Skills Retention Bonus (CSRB) for Army Physician Assistant (PA) Officers in the Active Component (AC). Army Regulation 350-100 (Officer Active Duty Service Obligation) establishes guidance on ADSOs for officers, defines how service obligations will be computed and served, and establishes how officers will be notified of service obligations. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056294C070420
He states that he signed a request for a Dental Officer Accession Bonus with the understanding that his ADSO would be for four years. He received orders for active duty showing an eight year ADSO; however, on 21 September 1998 the orders were amended to four years, because he allegedly declined the accession bonus. The HPLRP contract which he signed required another 4 year obligation, and clearly stated that any other ADO for acceptance of an incentive program or accession bonus was in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019486
The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to show he has already completed his 4 year Reserve Service Obligation (RSO). In Item 15 of this form the applicant acknowledged, "I further understand that the remaining portion of the service obligation is a reserve service obligation (RSO) and shall be served in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), unless the Secretary of the Army and I mutually agree that the remaining portion, or a part thereof, shall be served on active...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02901 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The duty title for the Officer Preselection Brief and the Promotion Recommendation Form reviewed by the Calendar Year 1998A (CY98A) Central Colonel Selection Board should be changed to “Dental Residency Flight Commander,” and he be given promotion...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005258
The applicant requests correction of her Office of the Surgeon General (OTSG) Form 1093 (Armed Forces Service Agreement - Retention, Department of the Army, Armed Forces Active Duty Health Professions Loan Repayment (AD-HPLR) Program to show she did not have a 2-year active duty service obligation (ADSO) at the time she accepted the AD-HPLR and that she be allowed to resign her commission. However, by email, dated that day, an official at HRC - Officer Personnel Management Directorate...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061590C070421
He also stated in his request that he was currently serving a remaining active duty obligation of 4 years for his fully funded graduate school at Cornell University. The applicant’s records contain a copy of Headquarters, US Army Missile Command Orders Number 171-7, dated 5 September 1991, which is an amendment to Orders Number 168-14, dated 30 August 1991. Army Regulation 350-100 establishes guidance on active duty service obligations (ADSOs) for officers, defines how service obligations...
ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | 20040010322
At the time, he did not object to war or involvement with the military. He believed the applicant had a firm, fixed, and sincere objection to participating in war in any form because of religious training and belief. The Board notes that many of the letters of support provided by the applicant with his request for CO status expressed the belief of those individuals that they had no doubt the applicant's request for CO status was sincere and not because he did not want to participate in any...