When Ben first signed up for G-RAP, he was given a short test on a computer, which he completed in roughly 10 minutes, and a set of directives on how to be a successful RA. Although it was suggested he would receive further training as the program developed, that never was provided. Docupak did publish a very short guidebook called G-RAP Guideline, Version 1.5. In this original and only official version, the one action that was termed against the rules, and indeed punishable, was sharing any of the monies earned by an RA with an actual full time National Guard Recruiter.

So imagine Ben’s surprise when examining the documents itemizing his alleged crimes, he discovered a set of G-RAP rules that he had never seen before, G-RAP Guideline Version 2.0. After many hours of research by Ben and others, that document could not be found or replicated on any official G-RAP site, Army National Guard promotional materials for G-RAP, or any news outlet that helped market G-RAP to soldiers. Version 2.0 was not printed on any letterhead, had no page numbers, no lineage to show when it was created, or what official document it replaced. Most importantly, the rules in Version 2.0 varied considerably from the rules that G-RAP was based on and that soldiers were instructed to use as they mentored new recruits, as seen in Version 1.5.

Specifically, this new, mysterious Version 2.0 prohibits RAs from receiving information from a Guard recruitment officer. Version 1.5, the version that was published widely and circulated to the RAs, states that information regarding recruits will come from the Recruiting and Retention Officer, including Legal Name (Birth Certificate);Address; Social Security Number (SSN Card); Date of Birth (Birth Certificate); Citizenship (Birth Certificate); Dependency Status (Marriage License).

Another discrepancy between the versions: From the FAQs in Version 1.5:

Question: “At what point do I no longer work with the potential Soldier?”

Answer: “Your responsibilities end upon receipt of your final $1,000 payment. However, you are encouraged to maintain a positive relationship with all of your new Soldiers.”

Version 2.0 states, “Additional responsibilities include maintaining contact with the new recruit and providing encouragement to reinforce the recruit’s decision to join the Guard.”

There are numerous discrepancies such as these. Army CID has been using the unverifiable Version 2.0 as a basis for their investigations and charges. Please note that to this day Version 1.5 can still be found on the National Guard website and in their magazine, as the official guidelines of how to legally and successfully be a Recruiting Assistant. Version 2.0 can only be found in the prosecutorial “evidence” of the cases being brought against National Guard soldiers. It appears nowhere else.

Back to our decorated soldier Ben, who has now found himself living in a Kafkaesque scenario. He had religiously followed the rules he was given — successfully encouraging 10 new recruits into the service, while also serving with honor and valor. His entire military career, his integrity, his livelihood, his future were suddenly called into question and compromised. Having dedicated his life to the military, he now has to rebuild his life after facing a felony charge.

Ben was also facing enormous legal fees to defend himself against what he viscerally and intellectually believed was an injustice. Sadly, many of Ben’s compatriots did not have the resources for a proper defense, and found themselves pleading to charges they could not fight; losing their military commissions and jobs, forced to attempt to move forward in their lives with a felony conviction. In many cases, these soldiers were also required to repay the government for the bonus money they earned (from Docupak). Soldiers, who had staked their lives on honor and service, were being attacked by their own command. Their lives were left in ruin.

In 2006, the Army National Guard, seeking new recruits, began the Guard Recruiting Assistant Program (G-RAP). Approximately 104,000 soldiers were requested by their command to serve as personal ambassadors for Guard, in an effort to bolster the dwindling numbers of enlistees. These soldiers became recruiting assistants (“RA”s), technically hired by a private government contractor, Docupak. Docupak was awarded $500 million to promote, manage, administer and monitor G-RAP.

The soldiers were offered a monetary incentive: For every soldier enlisted, they were paid up to $2,000. On the surface, this appears to be a great deal: The Guard bolsters its ranks; the soldiers are given an opportunity to supplement their minimal pay; and Docupak completes another profitable contract (they have many with the military). Everybody wins.

So let’s meet “Ben.” Ben is typical of National Guard soldiers who took part in the G-RAP program. His circumstances may be a composite, in order to honor his privacy, but his story is very real. Motivated by his belief in the service of country, as well as a chance to earn a bit of extra income, Ben was successful in bringing in 10 new recruits over the course of six years. Per directives, Ben accomplished this by serving as a mentor to his potential recruits, answering questions, sharing his experience, and in some cases accompanying them to drill, in order to prepare the individual for the physical demands of the enlistment.

Becoming a RA was easy: you took a 10 to 30-minute online test, hit the “I agree” button and presto, you were a Recruiting Assistant, working as an independent contractor for Docupak. More than 100,000 National Guard soldiers participated in the program. G-RAP brought 150,000 new soldiers into the National Guard during the six years of its existence.

Recently Ben learned, that along with 20,000 of his fellow soldiers, roughly one fifth of the soldiers who participated in G-RAP, the Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) was investigating him for fraud. The very success in recruiting that had prompted medals, accolades from command, and awarded rides in F-16s as incentives was now being reframed as fraud against the government. Ben, along with thousands of others, was suddenly facing disciplinary boards, a less than honorable discharge, and in some cases, criminal prosecution.

Next installment: Being investigated using rules that were never distributed to RAs