Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201774
Original file (0201774.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01774
            INDEX CODE:  100.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be allowed a second opportunity to enroll  in  the  Montgomery  GI
Bill (MGIB).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She  was  given  misleading  information  during  her  briefing.   She
declined the opportunity to enroll in the MGIB  because  she  was  not
aware it would pay for graduate studies.  She would now like to  apply
for MGIB benefits to pay for graduate studies.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force which is attached  at  Exhibit
C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAT states that 38 USC Chapter 30, Montgomery GI  Bill,  allows
an individual the opportunity to make a one-time election to disenroll
from the program.  This decision is irrevocable.  The applicant sought
relief through a waiver process but was denied  on  two  occasions  by
AF/DPDEV and AF/DP.  Although the applicant may have  been  under  the
impression the MGIB could  not  be  used  for  graduate  studies,  she
presented no evidence of  miscounseling  or  error  by  an  Air  Force
representative.  Consideration for relief  by  waiver  is  granted  to
those  who  can  provide  compelling  evidence  of  miscounseling.   A
possible misunderstanding of the program is not considered grounds  to
correct a  military  record.   Therefore,  they  recommend  denial  of
applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that she is not
contending that this was a misunderstanding.  Rather,  the  incomplete
and misleading information given during her  briefing  influenced  her
decision to decline the MGIB.

Applicant's complete response, with attachment, 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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the  existence  of  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or   injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of material error  or  injustice;  that  the
application was denied without a personal  appearance;  and  that  the
application will only be reconsidered upon  the  submission  of  newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 14 August 2002, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:


                       Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Panel Chair
                       Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Jr., Member
                       Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Jun 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAT, dated 18 Jun 02.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 28 Jun 02.




                             ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR.
                             Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03873

    Original file (BC-2002-03873.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03873 INDEX NUMBER: 128.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be made eligible for Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits. The law stipulates all MGIB- eligible individuals are automatically enrolled in the MGIB upon entering active duty and are given a one-time opportunity...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01930

    Original file (BC-2005-01930.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2007 | BC-2006-03184

    Original file (BC-2006-03184.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She requested the monies paid in her behalf under the College Loan Repayment Program (CLRP) be refunded to the Air Force because her school closed. On 8 December 2006, AFPC/DPPAT requested the applicant provide documentation to support that the amount of $5,420 paid to her lending institution under the CLRP was, in fact, returned to the United States Treasury. There is no evidence to support the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03456

    Original file (BC-2005-03456.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of six emails, and a copy of a letter requesting MGIB enrollment, with attachments. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAT states that the applicant submitted a DD Form 2366 dated 14 January 2002 in which she has elected disenrollment from the MGIB program. In the applicant’s master record is a DD Form 2366 dated 29 January 2002.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02242

    Original file (BC-2005-02242.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Public Law (PL) 101-689 was established to allow those servicemembers who entered active duty from 1 July 1985 through 30 June 1988, who declined participation in the MGIB upon entry on active duty, another opportunity to enroll during the open period. The evidence of record indicates the applicant was afforded the opportunity to enroll in the MGIB in 1985 and again in 1989 and declined participation on both occasions. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, and in the absence of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00467

    Original file (BC-2006-00467.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She states she did not learn about the benefits of the MGIB program until she was in discussion with other military members after separating from the military. In an effort to provide the applicant an opportunity to present an incontrovertible case supporting her request, she was asked to provide supplementary documentation from witnesses who could corroborate the error or injustice causing her decision to disenroll from the MGIB. Novel, Panel Chair Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member Ms. Jan...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00623

    Original file (BC-2004-00623.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2004 | BC-2004-01550

    Original file (BC-2004-01550.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 June 2003, he completed DD Form 2366, and was disenrolled from the MGIB. Applicant contends that he received a very quick briefing on the MGIB program and mistakenly signed the form disenrolling him from the MGIB program. However, based on the evidence of record, he has failed to substantiate that he was improperly counseled regarding his entitlements to the MGIB, or that procedural errors were made by the Air Force.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00246

    Original file (BC-2007-00246.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Deputy Chief of Staff, Manpower and Personnel, released an FY07 Force Shaping message outlining the voluntary separation pay (VSP) incentives which pays a lump sum payment to officers who voluntarily separate from active duty. The opportunity to participate or reverse a previous declination to participate in MGIB, if previously considered ineligible, is not authorized by the SecAF for those individuals who elect to separate voluntarily. We took notice of the applicant's complete...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01175

    Original file (BC-2006-01175.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01175 INDEX CODE: 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 OCTOBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be reimbursed $900 for contributions paid on her Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB). The AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAT recommends denial. We took notice of the...