RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            6 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20050011692


      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. Curtis Greenway               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Richard T. Dunbar             |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Laverne V. Berry              |     |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, payment of a college loan under the
terms of the Loan Repayment Program (LRP).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that during the enlistment process,
recruiting officials at the Phoenix Military Entrance Processing Station
(MEPS) informed her that her Partnership Loans were covered under LRP, and
at that time, she entered the Delayed Entry Program for one year.  She
states that when she returned to the Sioux Falls MEPS to depart for active
duty, recruiting officials informed her that the Partnership Loans she had
were not covered under the LRP.  At this time, she was given the option to
back out of her contract, or to continue with her military career.  She
states that given she had no other employment plans, she chose to enter
active duty.  The applicant finally asks that her three Partnership Loans
be paid, and that she be relieved of the financial hardship these loans
have placed on her.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of her
application:  Army Ground Forces Band Letter of Support; Human Resources
Command (HRC) Acting Chief, Education Incentives and Counseling Branch
Letter; Iowa Student Loan Liquidity Corp Letter; DOD Educational LRP Annual
Application (DD Form 2475); Partnership Loan Application and Promissory
Note; and Iowa Student Loan Liquidity Corp Billing Statement.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The military records show that the applicant enlisted and entered the
United States Army Reserve (USAR) Delayed Entry Program (DEP) on 13 August
2001. On 25 July 2002, she entered active duty in the Regular Army (RA) for
four years.  A DA Form 3286-66 (Annex D) on file confirms the options and
incentives the applicant contracted for during her enlistment processing.
The LRP is one of the incentives authorized and the applicable LRP terms
are listed in paragraph 4 of this form.

2.  The LRP provisions of Annex D state, in pertinent part, that the
applicant understood she must disenroll from the GI Bill at the time she
entered active duty and if she failed to do this she would not be eligible
for the LRP.  It also indicated that the applicant understood that the
government will repay a designated portion of any loan she incurred that
was made, insured or guaranteed under Part B of the Higher Education Act
(Guaranteed Student Loan) or any loan under Part E of such act (National
Direct Student Loan) after 1 October 1975 and before she enlisted in the
Army.

3.  Annex D to the applicant’s enlistment contract further indicated that
the applicant’s enlistment for the LRP ensured her, provided she met and
maintained the prescribed prerequisites, that the portion or amount of her
student loans that could be repaid was 33 1/3 percent or $1,500, whichever
was greater of the unpaid principal balance for each year of service
completed up to a maximum of $65,000.

4.  On 8 July 2004, the HRC Chief, Education Incentives and Counseling
Branch, notified the applicant that her Iowa Student loan did not qualify
for repayment under the LRP.  The applicant was advised to apply to this
Board if she believed she had not been properly counseled or that an error
or injustice had occurred.

5.  The applicant provides a letter from her unit commander who supports
her request based on the circumstances she presented.  The unit commander
asks that given the Army's current challenges to recruit and retain
Soldiers and the applicant's dedicated service, consideration of her
request for LRP participation to authorize payment of her student loans be
made as an exception.

6.  The applicant also provides a copy of each of her three Partnership
Loan Application and Promissory Note contracts which shows the applicant
received loans in the amount of $14, 885; $10,000; and $12,000 for a total
of $36,885.

7.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment
Program) prescribes eligibility criteria governing the enlistment of
persons, with or without prior service (PS), into the Regular Army (RA) and
the USAR.  Chapter 6, section II, contains guidance on the Guidance
Counselor Processing Phase.  It states, in pertinent part, that Guidance
Counselors will use the supporting automated systems and updated regulatory
material applicable to MOS and available options to counsel all applicants
on their enlistment options.  It further states that Guidance Counselors
will counsel applicants who fail to meet specific qualifications for
options for which they applied and advise them of other available options.

8.  The LRP is a Department of the Army enlistment option authorized by
Title 10 of the United States Code, section 2171 (10 USC 2171), which
provides the legal authority for the education loan repayment program for
enlisted members on active duty in specified military specialties.  The law
states, in pertinent part, that loans that qualify for repayment are
Guaranteed Student Loan/Stafford Loans, National Direct Student
Loan/Perkins Loans, William D. Ford Loans, Supplemental Loans for Students,
Federally Insured Student Loans (FISL), Parent Loan for Undergraduate
Students (PLUS), Auxiliary Loan Assistance for Students (ALAS), and
consolidated loans which fall under Title IV, Part B or E of the Higher
Education Act of 1965, or William D. Ford Loan.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  It is clear the applicant’s student loan did not meet the criteria
established by law and regulation to qualify for repayment by the Army
under the LRP.  The loans were not made, insured, or guaranteed under Title
IV, Part B, D, or E of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as is required.
However, this is not the overriding factor in this case given the equity
considerations and the resultant injustice.

2.  By regulation, Army Guidance Counselors are required to verify and
counsel applicants on their eligibility for the options they agreed to
prior to their departing for active duty.  Further, these counselors are
obligated to advise applicants on any options they agreed to, but are not
eligible for, and on any available alternatives.

3.  The evidence of record confirms that prior to her departure for basic
training, recruiting guidance counselors appropriately advised the
applicant that her loans in question did not qualify for payment under the
LRP.  Based on the loans not being eligible for repayment under the terms
of the LRP, recruiting officials properly gave the applicant the option to
be released from her contract.  Being fully informed of her options, the
applicant chose to enter active duty, knowing that her loans would not be
paid through the LRP, and that she was obligated to repay the loans in
question.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence of any error or
injustice related to the applicant’s enlistment and no evidentiary basis
upon which to grant the requested relief.

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 request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___CG __  __RTD __  __LVB __  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.





            ____Curtis Greenway____________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050011692                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/10/06                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |NA                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |NA                                      |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |NA                                      |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |NA                                      |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |113.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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