APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his $1,2000.00 contribution to the Montgomery G.I. Bill (MGIB) be refunded to him.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was told when he enlisted that the MGIB was an investment which paid for a soldier’s education.  When he was being inprocessed on active duty at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, he was told that enrollment in the MGIB was mandatory and he could not decline the option.  When he objected, he was told that his family could use the educational benefits.  The applicant did not want the MGIB as he could only use the program for a doctorate since he already had a substantial portion of the credits necessary for a master’s degree, and he has no desire to continue his education at the doctorate level.

In support of his request he submits a letter written by a warrant officer who states that the applicant addressed his problem with the MGIB during his first few weeks of his assignment to his unit, and that he completely believes in the truth of the applicant’s story.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

On 23 November 1993 he enlisted in the Army Delayed Entry Program (DEP).  At that time he completed a DA Form 3286-67, Statement of Understanding (Army Policy), in which item 5 states “I have enlisted for the following Educational Incentive Programs (initial under the appropriate column for each program).”  That form then has yes and no areas for the enlistee to initial if the MGIB, the Army College Fund (ACF), or the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP) are chosen in conjunction with the enlistment.  The applicant initialed the “Yes” item for the MGIB and the “No” item for the ACF and the SLRP.  The applicant’s enlistment contract shows that he had a bachelor’s degree at the time of his enlistment, but did not submit any evidence of completing any post-graduate courses.

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 31 January 1994.  On 2 February 1994 he signed a DD Form 2366 in which he was informed that he would be automatically enrolled in the MGIB, and have $100.00 a month deducted from his pay for 12 months, unless “I exercise the option to disenroll by signing Item 3 below”, and “I understand that unless I disenroll from the MGIB, my basic pay will be reduced $100 per month for EACH of the first 12 full months of active duty and this basic pay reduction cannot be REFUNDED, SUSPENDED OR STOPPED.”  Directly underneath his signature on this form is item 3, Statement of Disenrollment, which states “I do not desire to participate in the New GI Bill.  I understand that I WILL NOT be able to enroll at a later date.”  That section of the form was not signed by the applicant.

The MGIB, as outlined in title 38, United States Code, chapter 30, section l411(b), provides for soldiers who entered the service after 30 June l985, to be automatically enrolled into the MGIB and to contribute $l,200.00 during their first l2 months service, which is non-refundable.  After completion of their service obligation, he or she is entitled to receive up to $300.00 per month educational benefits for 36 months.  The program is administered by the VA.

In the processing of this case an advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) was obtained from the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM).  The PERSCOM recommended disapproval of the applicant’s request.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinions, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant has not submitted any documentation to substantiate his allegation that he was forced to enroll in the MGIB.  

2.  He states in his application that he had no desire to continue his education, yet he expressed his interest in the MGIB when he enlisted in the DEP.

3.  The form the applicant signed to enroll in the MGIB clearly outlined his option to disenroll, and provided the space to do so.  Therefore, it would be reasonable to assume that he understood that he was enrolling in the MGIB and should not be allowed to change that selection at this late date.

4.  Based on the preceding conclusions, there is no reason to refund the applicant’s MGIB contributions.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting his request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director