Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608788C070209
Original file (9608788C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That she be given the Army College Fund (ACF) enlistment option.

APPLICANT STATES:  That she was told by her recruiter that she was qualified for the ACF and that it would be entered into her enlistment contract.  Her military occupational specialty (MOS) of 76Y (unit supply specialist) qualified for the ACF as did her Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) score.  She did not learn that the ACF had not been included in her enlistment contract until after she was separated from active duty, went to college and attempted to use the ACF.

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

She enlisted in the Army Delayed Entry Program on 30 May 1987 and in the Regular Army on 10 November 1987.  At the time of her enlistment in the Regular Army, she executed a DA Form 3286, U.S. Army Enlistment Option, in which she elected the 2-year enlistment and the training of choice enlistment options.  The space provided for an enlistee to elect the ACF had been left blank.

She entered on active duty on 10 November 1987, was awarded MOS 76Y (which was later reclassified to MOS 92Y), served continuously through reenlistments, and was promoted to pay grade E-5.  She was honorably discharged on 31 May 1995 by reason of parenthood.  She had completed a total of 7 years, 6 months and 21 days of active duty.

The Montgomery G.I. Bill (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, unless declined, and to contribute $l,200.00 during their first l2 months service, which is nonrefundable.  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 Department of Veterans Affairs.

The ACF is an incentive program which is available to certain Regular Army enlistees who participate in the MGIB.  In addition to the monthly monetary educational benefits given to soldiers who participate in the MGIB, the Army also provides a “kicker” in the form of the ACF, which is a set amount of money which is determined by the length of an enlistment.  To be eligible for the ACF, the soldier must be a high school graduate, have an AFQT score of 50 or above, remain enrolled in the MGIB, and enlist for certain military occupational specialties, as determined by the Department of the Army.

In the processing of this case the staff of the Board found it necessary to contact the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) for additional information.  The PERSCOM stated that the ACF was available for MOS 76Y in May 1987 (the month the applicant enlisted in the DEP), but not in November 1987 (the month the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army).  The PERSCOM stated that while potential enlistees will normally express interests in enlistment options when they enlist in the DEP, they cannot actually enlist for those options until they enlist in the Regular Army.  This is in part necessary because the potential enlistees have not as yet completed military entrance tests (such as AFQT) so their eligibility for specific enlistment options cannot be ascertained until after their enlistment in the DEP.

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

1.  The applicant’s MOS was not on the list of the skills approved for the ACF at the time of her enlistment in the Regular Army.  As such, she could not have been offered that enlistment incentive at that time.

2.  While the applicant may have expressed an interest in the ACF when she enlisted in the DEP, she could not enlist for that option at that time.

3.  She has not shown that any promises were made to her beyond those stated in her enlistment contract.  To the contrary, her enlistment contract clearly shows that she only enlisted for the 2-year enlistment and the training of choice enlistment options.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for
granting the applicant's 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

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9606928C070209

    Original file (9606928C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show that he enlisted for the Army College Fund (ACF). The applicant’s military records show he enlisted in the DEP on 15 June 1990. RECOMMENDATION: That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 November 1990 with the ACF enlistment option, as an exception to policy.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607808C070209

    Original file (9607808C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The ACF is an incentive program which is available to certain Regular Army enlistees who participate in the MGIB. To be eligible for the ACF, the soldier must be a high school graduate, have an AFQT score of 50 or above, remain enrolled in the MGIB, and enlist for certain military occupational specialties, as determined by the Department of the Army. The PERSCOM stated that the MOS the applicant enlisted for was not qualifying for the ACF in conjunction with his 4-year term of service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9511373C070209

    Original file (9511373C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    At that time, he executed a DA Form 3286, U.S. Army Enlistment Option, U.S. Army Delayed Entry Program, in which he elected the training of choice and the Montgomery G.I. To be eligible for the ACF, the soldier must be a high school graduate, have an AFQT score of 50 or above, remain enrolled in the MGIB, and enlist for certain military occupational specialties, as determined by the Department of the Army. The PERSCOM stated that the ACF is not an option for which an individual becomes...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607684C070209

    Original file (9607684C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT STATES: That he opted for the ACF when he enlisted, and has now been told he is not eligible to participate in that program. In support of his application he submits a copy of an addendum to his enlistment contract wherein he opted for the Montgomery G.I. The PERSCOM stated that the applicant enlisted in the DEP for an MOS which was eligible for the ACF, but changed his MOS to one which was not eligible for the ACF prior to his enlistment in the Regular Army.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9606453C070209

    Original file (9606453C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, the applicant requests that his enlistment contract be corrected to show that he selected the Army College Fund (ACF) enlistment option. When he enlisted in the Army Reserve he signed a DA Form 3286-59 series, Statement for Enlistment, US Army Enlistment Option, US Army Delayed Enlistment Program. When he enlisted in the Regular Army he signed a DA Form 3286-60 series, Statement for Enlistment, US Army Enlistment Options.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607678C070209

    Original file (9607678C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    When a soldier enlists for this option, a DA Form 3286-66 must be completed indicating that he has been promised the LRP, and the soldier must disenroll from the MGIB. The PERSCOM stated that no loans have been paid for the applicant under the LRP, but a note in his file shows that he had informed that office that he has loans which would qualify under the Higher Education Act of 1965, but has not as yet submitted those notes for payment. In the applicant’s case, that form is not present,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066586C070402

    Original file (2002066586C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PERSCOM stated that the USAREC’s response to the applicant’s member of Congress was incorrect, that while the maximum amount of the ACF increased to $50,000 prior to his enlistment in the Regular Army, his MOS was not one which qualified for the higher ACF amount. The applicant’s father also details how his son’s recruiter told his school about the amount of money he was going to receive for his enlistment, and submits a copy of the documents his recruiter sent to his school and a copy...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605410C070209

    Original file (9605410C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    In conjunction with his enlistment he completed a DA Form 3286-67, Statement of Understanding, Army Policy, in which is stated in item 5 “I have enlisted for the following Educational Incentive Programs (initial under the appropriate column for each program).” That form provided yes and no spaces for the enlistee to initial if the MGIB, the Army College Fund (ACF), or the LRP was chosen in conjunction with the enlistment. The LRP is an educational enlistment incentive which provides for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607234C070209

    Original file (9607234C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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’s enlistment contract shows that he had a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063816C070421

    Original file (2001063816C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant enlisted for the $30,000 ACF. It is the opinion of the Board that the PERSCOM has more than corrected any injustice that may have existed in this case, and that no further action by the Board is required.