2. The applicant requests, in effect, that her separation date from active duty be extended in order to qualify for educational benefits which she contributed to while on active duty. She states that had she known she was only days short of completing the required 30 months of active duty in order to qualify for her GI Bill benefits she would have requested a latter separation date by utilizing some of her 42 days of accrued leave.
3. Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant entered active duty on 27 December 1985 for a period of 3 years. Her enlistment contract contains a statement indicating that the Veterans Education Assistance Program and Army College Fund were no longer available to individuals entering active duty after 30 June 1985 but that she would be eligible to enroll in a similar program and would be informed of the benefits and requirements of the new program in more detail before she entered active duty. There is no further evidence, other than the fact that she did contribute to the newly implemented Montgomery GI Bill, that she ever received any additional counseling concerning eligibility and utilization of those benefits.
4. On 22 June 1988 the applicant was voluntarily released from active duty to enter an ROTC program at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. At the time of the applicants separation she had 42 days of accrued leave and had completed 2 years, 5 months, and 26 days of creditable service; 4 days short of 30 months.
5. Chapter 30, Title 38 of the US Code established eligibility requirement for participation in the Veterans' Educational Assistance Act of 1984 (New GI Bill). It provided that individuals who entered an initial period of active duty on or after 1 July 1985 would be automatically enrolled in the program unless they opted to disenroll within a specific time frame established by the individual services. Once enrolled in the New GI Bill the individual's basic pay was reduced $100.00 per month for each of the
first full 12 months of active duty and could not be refunded, suspended or stopped. An honorable discharge is required for receipt of entitlements, which amounted to $300.00 per month for 36 months, for individuals who completed at least 3 years of active duty. To meet eligibility requirements the applicant would have needed to remain on active duty until 26 June 1988.
6. Telephonic information received from the Education Incentives Branch at the Total Army Personnel Command revealed that individuals voluntarily separated from active duty to participate in an approved ROTC program were considered to have been released from active duty for the convenience of the government and required to complete on 30 months of their 36 month enlistment contract in order to be eligible for education benefits.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was voluntarily separated from active duty for the convenience of the government to participate in an approved ROTC program. However, there is no indication that she was ever counseled concerning the requirement to remain on active for a period of 30 months in order to obtain educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill.
2. It is reasonable to presume that had the applicant been properly counseled she would have requested a separation date that would have enable her to complete the required 30 months of active service.
3. In view of the circumstances in this case, and in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate to extend the applicants service by 4 days, until 26 June 1988, in order to meet eligibility requirements for the Montgomery GI Bill.
4. In view of the foregoing, it would be appropriate to correct the applicants records as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected:
a. by showing that the action separating the individual concerned from active duty on 22 June 1988 is void and of no force or effect; and
b. by showing that she was separated from active duty on 26 June 1988.
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
CHAIRPERSON
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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710800
The applicant entered the Army on 15 March 1977 and served on continuous active duty until his honorable discharge on 31 March 1985. Information obtained from the VA indicates that VEAP allowed active duty personnel to voluntarily participate in a plan for education, and that soldiers were eligible to enroll if they entered active duty for the first time after 31 December 1976 and before 1 July 1985. The applicant first entered on active duty on 15 March 1977 making him ineligible for MGIB...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008529
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his discharge document to show he contributed to the Veterans Educational Assistance Program (VEAP). Therefore, considering all the evidence and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request for correction of Item 15a of his DD Form 214. While the Board does not dispute the fact that the applicant was told that his discharge document contained an error...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02595
In support of her application, applicant provided a personal letter, and DD Form 2366, Montgomery GI Bill Act of 1984 Basic Enrollment. The law stipulates that 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 applicant's record reflects her decision on 8 March 1999 not to participate in the MGIB program and her understanding she would not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060008019
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 February 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060008019 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. His DD Form 1966/1-8 (Application for Enlistment-Armed Forces of the United States) that was completed when the applicant enlisted, shows the entry "I UNDERSTAND THAT I AM ELIGIBLE FOR THE ARMYS ENLISTMENT BONUS AND...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013161
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). An excerpt from his DA Form 3286-40 (Annex A) (Statements for Enlistment Delayed Entry Program), dated 20 June 1985 shows the following statement: I UNDERSTAND THAT IF I ENTER ACTIVE DUTY AFTER 30 JUNE 1985 I WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE VETERANS EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (VEAP) OR THE ARMY COLLEGE FUND, BUT THAT I WILL BE ELIGIBLE TO ENROLL IN A SIMILAR PROGRAM. The applicant contends, in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087262C070212
In response to that letter, the Human Resources Command, Alexandria Virginia, stated that the active duty for training the applicant completed as a reservist did not qualify under law for time served for the purpose of establishing benefits under the MGIB. Since the MGIB eligibility is established by law, and the Board is not empowered to violate law, the Board is unable to grant the applicant’s request as written. However, the Board could otherwise establish the applicant’s eligibility to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9508725C070209
A 20 November 1995 advisory opinion from an official of the office of the Chief of the Army Reserve indicates that the applicant enlisted in the Army Reserve on 29 October 1987 for the student loan repayment program, and after basic training, requested to be discharged from the Army Reserve upon his enlistment in the New Mexico ARNG as an ROTC SMP cadet. He enlisted in the ARNG on 28 September 1988. There was no record that the applicant was an unsatisfactory participant while assigned to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000286
BOARD DATE: 15 July 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100000286 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Active duty personnel participated in the Veterans' Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) if they entered active duty for the first time after 31 December 1976 and before 1 July 1985 and made a contribution prior to 1 April 1987. The Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB), as outlined in Title 38, U.S. Code, Chapter 30, provides for Soldiers who entered the service after 30 June 1985 to contribute...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03184
_________________________________________________________________ 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...