RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            22 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20050003931


      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.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Lisa O. Guion                 |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Thomas A. Pagan               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Eric N. Anderson              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Joe R. Schroeder              |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) education
benefits.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that upon entering the Army, he was
misled into believing that he was eligible for MGIB benefits.  He indicates
that he was allowed to enroll in the MGIB and that he made his $1200.00
contribution.  He further states that after his discharge from the Army, he
enrolled in a local university with the understanding that his MGIB would
pay his tuition fees.  However, he received a letter from the Department of
Veteran Affairs (VA) stating that he was not eligible for the MGIB benefits
due to his loan repayment program (LRP) participation.  The applicant now
requests that he be reimbursed his college tuition in the amount of
$3,867.00.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his
application:  MGIB Act of 1984 (DA Form 2366); MGIB Benefit Denial Letter;
and Marywood University Student Invoice #003.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The military records show that the applicant enlisted and entered the
United States Army Reserve (USAR) Delayed Entry Program on 1 December 2000.
 The Record of Military Processing-Armed Forces of the United States (DD
Form 1966/3) completed at that time shows the applicant opted to
participate in the Loan Repayment Program (LRP).

2.  On 1 December 2000, during his enlistment processing, the applicant
completed a Statement of Disenrollment (DD Form 2366).  In Section 3
(Service Unique Education Assistance Options), he acknowledged that he
understood he was enlisting for the LRP and as a result, he had to
disenroll from the MGIB.  The applicant authenticated this document with
his signature in Section 4 (Statement of Disenrollment), which confirmed
his disenrollment from the MGIB and contained the statement "I understand
that I will not be able to enroll at a later date."

3.  On 16 January 2001, the applicant entered active duty.  A DA Form 3286-
66 (Annex D) on file again confirms the options and incentives the
applicant contracted for during his enlistment processing.  The LRP is one
of the incentives authorized and the applicable LRP terms are listed in
paragraph 4 of this form.

4.  The LRP provisions of Annex D state, in pertinent part, that the
applicant understood he must disenroll from the MGIB at the time he entered
active duty and if he failed to do this he would not be eligible for the
LRP.

5.  On 16 January 2001, the applicant and the recruiting guidance counselor
completed Section V (Recertification) and Section VI (Remarks) of the DD
Form 1966/3.  This form confirmed there were no changes to the applicant’s
original contract agreement.

6.  On 18 January 2001, after entering active duty, the applicant enrolled
in the MGIB.

7.  During the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained
from the Chief, Incentives and Budget Branch, Office of the Deputy Chief of
Staff, G-1.  In the opinion, this recruiting official indicates that the
applicant signed a DD Form 2366, dated 1 December 2000, that contained the
statement "I understand that I am enlisting for the LRP; therefore, I must
disenroll from the MGIB," and that he initialed a DD Form 3286-66, which
explained that unless he disenrolled from the MGIB, his student loans would
not be paid.  The available records show that loan repayment was made in
the amount of $45,925.00.

8.  The Chief, Incentives and Budget Branch, further indicated that on
28 February 2005, Human Resources Command (HRC) notified the applicant that
an error had been made when the $1200.00 MGIB contribution was withheld
from his pay.  He was also notified that he would be reimbursed that
$1200.00 MGIB and he was informed on how to request reimbursement if it
were not received in 60 to 90 days.

9.  On 18 August 2005, the applicant responded to the G-1 advisory opinion.
 He stated that during the enlistment process he enrolled in the LRP and he
was initially told at the Military Entrance Processing Station (MPES) that
he was unable to participate in the MGIB.  He also indicates that while he
was
in-processing at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, expert officials informed him
that the regulation had recently been changed and that he was eligible to
participate in both the LRP and the MGIB.  He claims the Army should not
have untrained personnel in place that provide Soldiers’ inaccurate
information.

10.  The applicant goes on to state that the Army should have screened his
MGIB enrollment before accepting his money.  He finally states that he
fulfilled his obligation to the Army and he would expect the Army to pay
fifty percent of his tuition fees that resulted from the Army's mistake.

11.  Army Regulation 621-202 (Army Educational Incentives and Entitlements)
prescribes Army-unique policies, responsibilities, and procedures for the
administration of Veterans' education programs and education incentives
authorized by law.  It also provides information on MGIB eligibility.
Paragraph
9-9b(3) states, in pertinent part, that applicants’ will be informed that a
Soldier must be disenrolled from the MGIB to participate in the LRP.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he should receive MGIB benefits has
been carefully considered.  However, by regulation, a Soldier must
disenroll from the MGIB before LRP is paid.

2.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant opted for the LRP
incentive during the enlistment process.  At that time, he acknowledged
that he understood he had to disenroll from the MGIB to be eligible for the
LRP.  On 1 December 2000, the applicant disenrolled from the MGIB by
completing and signing a
DD Form 2366.  The applicant received $45,925.00 in LRP benefits, which
confirms his participation in the LRP.

3.  The evidence of record also shows after acknowledging that he would not
be able to enroll in the MGIB at a future date during his enlistment
processing, shortly after entering active duty, he enrolled in the MGIB.
This resulted in the collection of the $1200.00 MGIB contribution from his
military pay.  HRC officials informed the applicant of this administrative
error and advised him that he would be reimbursed the $1200.00 MGIB
contribution, and advised him of the procedures for requesting
reimbursement if he did not receive the payment within 60 to 90 days.

4.  The applicant was properly informed and he acknowledged that he would
not be eligible to participate in both the LRP and the MGIB.  The applicant
received the benefits of the LRP incentive option and he is therefore not
entitled to the MGIB.  As a result, there is no basis upon which to grant
the requested relief.

5.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily
appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to
submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___TAP  _  __ENA__  __JRS __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.




            ____Thomas A. Pagan   __
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050003931                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |NA                                      |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/11/22                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |2005/01/15                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 365-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |128.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]