RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01589
APPLICANT COUNSEL: NONE
SSN HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be allowed to enroll in the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the
letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force.
Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of
Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Force Management Branch, HQ AFROTC, reviewed the
application and recommended denial. They researched the applicant’s
records and it is documented in his records that he was briefed about
the MGIB on 21 Aug 98 (Exhibit B).
The Chief, Education Services Automation Section, HQ AFPC/DPPAT, also
reviewed the application and concurs with the rationale of AFROTC
advisory opinion. They recommend the applicant’s request be denied
(Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the advisory opinions and states he now
realizes that when he signed the enlistment papers in Aug 98 that it
covered the eligibility requirements for MGIB. However, the
detachment commander wrote in a letter of support that to his
knowledge he was unaware of any briefings being given to address the
issues of the MGIB. The applicant also states, that during his
senior year at the University of Iowa he was not briefed on the
eligibility of the GI Bill and as a consequence no one in his class
turned down their scholarship in order to qualify for the GI Bill.
He accepts full responsibility for this oversight but feels that
there should have been some type of process in place to alert
officials that cadets were forfeiting their GI bill eligibility. The
applicant states he will gladly return his last semester’s tuition to
help resolve this situation.
Applicant’s complete response is attached at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
law or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice. After thoroughly
reviewing the documentation submitted with this appeal, to include the
letter from the commander of the AFROTC Detachment, we are persuaded
that the applicant did not receive the MGIB briefing prior to his
Spring 2000 semester. The commander of the AFROTC Detachment, states
that, to his knowledge, this briefing was not given to the cadets due
to the reassignment of the individual responsible for briefing the
cadets. The applicant states that he apparently signed his enlistment
papers covering the eligibility requirements of the MGIB, however, he
was not briefed during his senior year that by accepting the
scholarship he would be forfeiting his opportunity to participate in
the MGIB. It is understandable that he may have forgotten about the
eligibility criteria he acknowledged in 1998. Clearly, based on what
in-state tuition would have cost him, if he had been properly briefed
prior to his last semester, he would have undoubtedly declined his
scholarship, in return for maintaining his MGIB eligibility. We note
his willingness to repay his last semester’s tuition in order to be
eligible to participate in the MGIB. In view of these circumstances,
we believe any doubt should be resolved in favor of the applicant.
Accordingly, we recommend that the applicant’s record be corrected as
indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that provided he reimburses
the United States Air Force for his Air Force Reserve Officer Training
Corps (AFROTC) Spring 2000 Semester college tuition, he declined his
AFROTC Scholarship for the Spring 2000 semester at the University of
Iowa.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 9 November 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603.
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. George Franklin, Member
Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 May 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFROTC/RRF, dated 7 Jul 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAT, dated 15 Aug 00.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 1 Sep 00.
Exhibit E. Applicant's response, dated 18 Sep 00.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 00-01589
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Having reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction for Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116) it is
directed that:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, SSN, be corrected to show that provided he
reimburses the United States Air Force for his Air Force Reserve
Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) Spring 2000 Semester college tuition,
he declined his AFROTC Scholarship for the Spring 2000 semester at the
University of Iowa.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00623
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 3 September 1993, the applicant signed an AF Form 1056, Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) Contract. Congress purposely made ROTC graduates ineligible for the MGIB in its effort to prevent individuals from receiving “double” benefits. She further indicates if she received scholarship monies she would have received between $6,000.00 and $12,000.00 per year.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02743
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02743 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. AFROTC records indicate that he received POCI funds, which was confirmed in his request as well. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03735
It would also allow the Air Force to determine if he was fit for continued military service and to take the appropriate action. They further noted the applicant claimed that his medical condition began while he was on active duty. Additionally, we note that even though the final decision of AFROTC headquarters was to disenroll him, his AFROTC Detachment commander had recommended he be returned to active duty so he could possibly receive medical attention for his illness.
AFBCMR 01-00853 INDEX NUMBER: 128.10 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36- 2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01930
DPPAT states that the law stipulates all MGIB eligible individuals are automatically enrolled in the MGIB upon entering active duty and are given a one- time opportunity to disenroll should they desire not to participate in the program. The information provided to the applicant during the MGIB briefing and BTES is correct in that TA will pay for a master’s degree. The HQ AFPC/DPPAT evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00310
The applicant is seeking to have the loans paid that were incurred during the time he was erroneously separated from active duty (two consecutive years before the AFBCMR corrected his record and he was reinstated on active duty). The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the following advisory opinion is provided concerning the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00757
The contract states he would be kept in the Inactive Reserves for up to 12 months, which the Air Force exceeded. The applicant also claims a staff sergeant misinformed him at the time he signed the enlistment contract and said the “voided contract is just one example of why he should be allowed to re-enroll in the MGIB.” The ROTC enlistment contract is not void or the applicant would not have served nearly 12 years of active duty. However, after entering active duty in 1991, he opted to...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02040
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02040 INDEX CODE: 100.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 November 2007 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The debt incurred as a result of his disenrollment from the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) be waived. On 1 August 2005, his detachment commander advised him...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-02517
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that he agrees with AFPC’s summary of his basis for request except for their final statement, “…there was a delay in signing the required paperwork needed to make the correction to his DIEUS.” He states, actually, there was an AFROTC-induced delay in processing his four-year scholarship award delaying his...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01923
d. The applicant admitted to deceiving the Commander of the AFROTC Detachment (Det) and a professor by lying about a grade change. On 26 Jan 04, the AFROTC Det commander requested from HQ AFROTC the applicant be investigated for disenrollment. However, the captains stated the applicant arrived at about 1230 on 12 Nov 03 and within 15 to 20 minutes of the interview began to tell the truth about her actions on the PFT, the failed summer course, being signed into LLAB, and lying to the AFROTC...