Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050009386C070206
Original file (20050009386C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        29 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050009386


      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             |
|     |Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr.             |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Stanley Kelley                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Melvin H. Meyer               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas            |     |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 that he be allowed to retake the Armed Forces
Qualifying Test (AFQT) so that he can qualify for an enlistment bonus and
the loan repayment program.

2.  The applicant states that about the time he finished his third year of
college he figured out that the employment opportunities in his field
(illustration) were not very promising.  He was recruited because of his
foreign language skills.  He was not told that he could retake the AFQT.
About a year after he entered active duty he learned that he could have
retaken the AFQT and that a score of 50 would have qualified him for the
enlistment incentives.  His recruiter later admitted to him that he had not
really known what he was doing.  Everyone he attended advanced individual
training with was receiving bonus money and LRP payments while he has to
pay off his student loans at $200.00 per month for 15 years.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his automated enlistment documents and
his initial training reservation.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  On 20 June 2003, the applicant enlisted and entered the Regular Army in
pay grade E-4.  He was approximately 21 years and 2 months old and had 16
years of education.  His AFQT was 46.

2.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment
Program) does not authorize AFQT retesting for the sole purpose of
qualifying an applicant for an enlistment incentive.

3.   The Loan Repayment Program is a Department of the Army enlistment
option authorized by Public Law 99-145.  This option is designed to
increase Test Score Category I-IIIA accessions [AFQT score of 50 or
higher].

4.  During the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained
from the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel (G-1).  It notes
that the governing regulation does not provide for AFQT retesting in order
to qualify an individual enlistment incentives.

5.  The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for comment or
rebuttal.  No response was received.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no regulatory provision for AFQT retesting in this instance.
Retesting was neither required nor indicated in this case.  The requested
relief is not warranted.

2.  The foregoing is in consonance with the advisory opinion from G-1.

3.  The recruiter appears to have simply "signed-up" a willing prospect who
was well above the average in age and education level.  There is no
indication that the recruiter did anything by omission or commission to
improperly induce the applicant to enlist.  Indeed, the applicant does not
even allege that this occurred.

4.  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

__LMD __  __SK___  __MHM__  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.





                                  __      Stanley Kelley________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050009386                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051129                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |112.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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


Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2005 | 20050011678C070206

    Original file (20050011678C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 17 September 2004, the applicant submitted his DA Forms 2475 (DOD Educational Loan Repayment Program (LRP) Annual Application) for the two Private Loans he obtained through Citibank USA, N.A. The applicant’s military records should be corrected to show his Statement for Enlistment was amended to include the sentence “If a student loan is accepted by the officials processing you for enlistment as payable under the LRP and the government fails to verify that the student loan accepted...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006040

    Original file (20120006040.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She provides: * DD Form 2366 (MGIB Basic Enrollment) * DA Form 3286 (Statement for Enlistment – U.S. Army Enlistment Program – U.S. Army Delayed Enlistment/Entry Program (DEP) (Annex A)) CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. This document shows she enlisted under the provisions of Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program) for Program 9A, U.S. Army Training Enlistment Program (UNCM), Option 03. The available evidence shows she signed a DD Form 2366 in which she...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050011621C070206

    Original file (20050011621C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence that she had any loans that do qualify for repayment under the LRP. The applicant’s military records should be corrected to show her DA Form 3286-66 was amended to include the sentence “If a student loan is accepted by the officials processing you for enlistment as payable under the LRP and the government fails to verify that the student loan accepted actually is eligible under the Higher Education Act of 1965 and such failure results in nonpayment of the loan by the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014171

    Original file (20130014171.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    She enlisted in the CAARNG on 13 March 2001 for the SLRP and bonus incentives. Years later her records were audited and a determination was made to recoup the SLRP incentive that was paid over the years. The applicant provides: * DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document) * NGB Form 600-7-1-R-E * NGB Form 600-7-3-R-E (Annex R to DD Form 4 – Reenlistment/Extension Bonus Addendum – ARNG) * NGB Form 600-7-5-R-E (Annex S to DD Form 4 – SLRP Addendum – ARNG) * Enlistment Bonus Control Number...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050011568C070206

    Original file (20050011568C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence that he had any loans that do qualify for repayment under the LRP. The applicant’s military records should be corrected to show his DA Form 3286-66 was amended to include the sentence “If a student loan is accepted by the officials processing you for enlistment as payable under the LRP and the government fails to verify that the student loan accepted actually is eligible under the Higher Education Act of 1965 and such failure results in nonpayment of the loan by the LRP...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018059

    Original file (20140018059.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states, in effect: * he enlisted in the California Army National Guard (CAARNG) with no prior service in 2006 * his recruiter advised him about the current benefits (e.g. GI Bill, Kicker and SLRP) available for enlisting in military occupational specialty (MOS) 92Y (Unit Supply Specialist), which was considered a critical MOS * being out of school for so long, he only scored a 49 on his AFQT (Armed Forces Qualification Test ); however, he needed a test score of 50 in order to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057777C070420

    Original file (2001057777C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board believes that the applicant most likely was not advised at enlistment that because her AFQT score was less than “50” she was not eligible for the LRP. The applicant’s military records may be corrected to show that his DA Form 3286-66, Statement of Understanding, US Army Incentive Enlistment Program, was amended to include the statement “If a student loan is accepted by the officials processing you for enlistment as payable under the LRP and the government fails to verify her AFQT...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007124

    Original file (20130007124.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant was not eligible for the SLRP at the time of her enlistment because her AFQT score of "41" was below the minimum AFQT score of "50" required by Army Regulation 135-7 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve Inventive Programs) and the Selected Reenlistment Incentive Program (SRIP) guidance to qualify for the Non-Prior Service (NPS) SLRP incentive. The advisory official recommends the ABCMR direct the CAARNG to correct the applicant's records as follows: * revoke her extension...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002067C070206

    Original file (20050002067C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    His Statement for Enlistment United States Army Enlistment Program shows that he enlisted for the LRP up to a maximum repayment of $65,000 in addition to other incentives. In doing so, the applicant's military records should be corrected to show his Statement for Enlistment United States Army Enlistment Program was amended to include the sentence “If a student loan is accepted by the official processing you for enlistment as payable under the LRP and the government fails to verify that the...