DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
MEH
Docket No. 7857-09
20 OEE 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 18 October 2010. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinions furnished by NPC memo 5000 Pers-43/072 of 16
Dec 09, and NPC memo 5420 PERS-43/009 of 23 June 2010, copies of
which are attached. The Board also considered your response to
the advisory opinions dated 19 September 2010.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinions.
The Board agreed with PERS 43 that the whole intent of the
Aviation Career Continuation Pay Program is/was to provide an
incentive to qualified aviation officers to obligate through a
Department Head tour (DH). Therefore, allowing an aviation
officer who voluntarily elects to submit an “opt out” letter (to
opt out of possible selection for DH) to receive and then retain
ACP incentive payments does not further the stated goal of
ensuring retention of aviation officers through a DH tour.
The Board understood and carefully considered your argument that
the guidance published prior to 2008 lacked clarity regarding
what was meant by the term “unearned portion.” However, the
Board found that the guidance was clarified by 2008 and that you
knew of the clarification at the time you decided to opt-out.
Thus, the Board found that your decision to opt out was
voluntarily made with the knowledge that you would be expected
to repay the bonus payments previously received. Moreover, the
Board also found that you were not treated any differently from
any other officer who opted out of consideration for department
head school after 2008. As you were previously advised, they
have all been required to repay the payments previously received
as well. Finally, the Board also carefully considered the e-
mails you received in 2007 when you were trying to obtain
clarification as to what was meant by the term “unearned
portion.” In the Board’s view, because allowing an officer who
“opts out” to retain previous bonus payments squarely conflicts
with the stated goals of the ACCP program, it should have been
obvious to all, including ee such
bonuses were not earned. And the Board regrets that the
information that you received from them was unclear and/or
erroneous on that point. However, the Board also notes that it
is well settled that unclear or erroneous information received
from agents does not serve as a basis for the payment of
allowances in excess of those that are provided for by statute
or regulation. For these reasons, your application has been
denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
the Board. In this regard, it is also important to keep in mind
that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an
official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to
demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN ‘*P E
Executive tor
Enclosures
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010232
He completed the UH-60 Aviator Qualification Course from 28 January through 8 March 2008. An NGB official stated that in accordance with ARNG Implementation Guidance for the CSRB, dated 1 February 2008, eligible officers could receive the CSRB. The applicant served in the ARNG as a warrant officer between 26 June 2006 and 19 January 2010.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02883
AFI 36-3207, Separating Commissioned Officers, states the Air Force normally requires recoupment of a portion of education assistance, special pay, or bonus money received when officers separate before completing the period of active duty they agreed to serve. Further, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (OUSD) Memorandum, dated 29 Nov 10, directs members with an SPD Code of FGQ (Intradepartmental Transfer) are required to repay the unearned portion of the bonus. THE BOARD...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05217-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2008. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 7220 Ser PERS-432/1075 of 14 Jul 08, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007492
The applicant served the required ADSO incurred through receipt of this incentive. The reason for debt states: "Recoupment is required for the unearned portion of your enlistment or reenlistment bonus based on your separation code BNC. Records indicate the applicant received a $30,000.00 CSRB on 26 May 2012 which obligated him to a 60-month ADSO.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007561
On 6 March 2007, he reenlisted for a period of 6 years (72 months) and a Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) bonus of $15,000.00. However, section 7-8 (Termination with recoupment), which curiously follows section 7-9, specifically provides for recoupment of the unearned portion of a reenlistment bonus, effective to the date of entry on AGR status, when a Soldier accepts an AGR position on Title 10 or Title 32 and has served less than six months of the incentive contract following the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014514
Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). His NPSEB Addendum shows he enlisted for a bonus in the amount of $20,000.00. was accepted and he was recognized as a high school graduate at the time of his enlistment; b. showing the appropriate authority cancelled any recoupment action; and c. paying him from Army National Guard funds any portion of the NPSEB not already paid, to the amount of $20,000.00.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120017316
His records also contain Orders 220-02 issued by NGB, dated 8 August 2007, which authorized him entitlement to ACIP effective 13 July 2007. The evidence of record shows he had been serving as a military technician since 1991 and was ineligible to accept the WOAB at the time of his appointment in the WAARNG on 3 May 2006. There is also no evidence of record and he provided insufficient evidence to show the incentive was unjustly terminated with recoupment of any advanced payments.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018053
The advisory official stated that based on available information, there is no record that any requests to either recoup or cancel her debt was made by her command. The advisory official recommended granting her request and cancelling the bonus-related debt based on her medical condition at the time of separation and honorable discharge. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. showing she was approved for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020404
An NGB official stated although the applicant was eligible for the CSRB with the INARNG on 6 December 2008 in the critical AOC of 25A, he failed to sign a CSRB Written Agreement. Office of the Under Secretary of Defense memorandum, dated 12 December 2007, approved payment of bonus to ARNG and USAR officers who agree to serve in an active status for not less than 3 years in certain AOCs designated as critical for the CSRB in accordance with Title 37, U.S. Code, section 323. As a result, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011511
The applicant requests, in effect, cancellation of any recoupment actions for the first installment payment of $10,000 minus taxes of a $20,000 Non-Prior Service Enlistment Bonus (NPSEB) he already received. His Annex E to DD Form 4 (Enlistment Bonus Addendum Army National Guard of the United States) confirms: * he enlisted for a critical skill MOS (15T) with authorization for a $20,000.00 bonus * he would receive the first bonus payment of 50 percent of the total authorized amount...