RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 8 February 2007
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050015344
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 |
| |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos | |Analyst |
The following members, a quorum, were present:
| |Mr. Jeffrey C. Redmann | |Chairperson |
| |Mr. David K. Haasenritter | |Member |
| |Mr. Ronald D. Gant | |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, that he be paid the $33,000 Army
College Fund (ACF) kicker.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that his enlistment contract states he
was to receive the $33,000 ACF in addition to his Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB)
payout.
3. The applicant provides his initial enlistment contract and his DD Form
214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant served in Operation Enduring Freedom.
2. The applicant enlisted in the Delayed Entry Program on 19 December
1997. His DA Form 3286-66, paragraph 1a states that he was enlisting for,
in addition to another incentive, the U. S. Army College Fund. Paragraph 3
states that, if his incentive in paragraph 1a was the ACF, he would be
awarded the amount of $33,000 for a 3-year enlistment. He enrolled in the
MGIB on 19 December 1997, as required for eligibility of the ACF incentive.
3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 February 1998 for 3
years.
4. On 24 November 2004, the applicant was honorably discharged due to
parenthood.
5. In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was provided by the
Education Incentives Branch, U. S. Army Human Resources Command (USAHRC).
That office noted that since 1 April 1993 the dollar amounts reflected on a
Soldier's enlistment contract, DA Form 3286-66, have combined MGIB and ACF
benefits. It noted that the DA Form 3286-66 does not clarify that
information and is misleading to the member entering active duty. When the
applicant entered active duty on 10 February 1998, the veteran's rate for
basic MGIB benefits was $15,834.60 for a 3-year term of service obligation.
Therefore, the ACF portion of his combined benefits was $17,165.40, which
equates to $476.81 per month for up to 36 months worth of benefits. Many
Soldiers entering active duty were erroneously led to believe they would
receive the MGIB rate plus the dollar amount as indicated on the enlistment
contract. They recommended that, if the applicant's request is granted,
the computation of any payment be based on the information provided in his
paperwork. They also recommended that any authorized compensation be sent
directly to the applicant.
6. A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for
comment or rebuttal. The applicant did not respond within the given time
frame.
7. In prior, similar cases, the Education Incentives Branch, USAHRC
confirmed that the ACF is a fixed amount based on the month and year the
member entered active duty.
8. Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment
Program), Table 9-4 of the version in effect at the time, explained the
ACF. It stated that applicants for enlistment would be advised of the
following: The ACF provided additional educational assistance in addition
to that earned under the GI Bill. The money earned would be deposited in
the Soldier's Department of Veterans Affairs account. Normally, the funds
would be disbursed to the participant in 36 equal monthly installments
while the person was enrolled in an approved program of education.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's contentions have been carefully considered.
2. It is acknowledged that nowhere in his contract does it state the ACF
amount includes the MGIB. However, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary (such as sworn statements or affidavits from his recruiting
officials) there is insufficient evidence to show he was not advised that
the $33,000 listed as his ACF benefit was the total combined amount of the
MGIB and the ACF.
3. Regrettably, there is insufficient evidence which would warrant
granting the relief requested.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__jcr___ __dkh___ __rdg___ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined that 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.
__Jeffrey C. Redmann__
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR20050015344 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON | |
|DATE BOARDED |20070208 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
|DISCHARGE REASON | |
|BOARD DECISION |DENY |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY |Mr. Chun |
|ISSUES 1. |112.00 |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002927C071029
Ronald D. Gant | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. When the applicant entered active duty on 9 June 2000 for a 3-year enlistment, the veteran's rate for basic MGIB benefits was $19,296.00 for a 3-year term of service obligation. There is insufficient evidence to show he was not advised that the $33,000 listed as his ACF benefit was the total combined amount of the MGIB and the ACF.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012690
The applicant enrolled in the MGIB on 13 June 2000, as was required for eligibility of the ACF incentive. She also stated that the applicant's contract reflects $50,000, which included $19,296.00, which was the basic rate of the MGIB when the applicant entered active duty on 11 June 2000, and the remainder $30,704.00 was her ACF incentive. The evidence of record confirms the applicant enlisted in June 2000, and there is insufficient evidence to show she was not advised that the $50,000...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040005403C070208
The applicant's DA Form 3286-66, paragraph 1a states that he was enlisting, in addition to the U. S. Army Training Enlistment Program, for the "US Army College Fund $30,000." The applicant's DA Form 3286-66, paragraph 1a stated that he was enlisting, in addition to the U. S. Army Training Enlistment Program, for the "US Army College Fund $30,000." The DVA informed the applicant that he would receive $35,460.00 in MGIB benefits plus $24,165.40 for his ACF benefits.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017437C071029
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. His DA Form 3286-66, paragraph 1a states that he was enlisting for, in addition to the U. S. Army Station/Command/Unit/Area Enlistment Program, the U. S. Army College Fund. The evidence of record confirms the applicant enlisted in July 2000, and there is insufficient evidence to show he was not advised that the $50,000 listed as his ACF benefit was the total combined amount of the MGIB and the ACF.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003808C070206
Robert L. Duecaster | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant's DA Form 3286-66, paragraph 1a states he was enlisting, in addition to the U. S. Army Station/Unit/Command/Area Enlistment Program, for the ACF. At the time the applicant enlisted, the ACF and the MGIB was a combination of the benefit (MGIB) and the incentive (ACF).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050016988C071029
Ronald D. Gant | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. His DA Form 3286-66, paragraph 1a states that he was enlisting for, in addition to other incentives, the U. S. Army College Fund. There is insufficient evidence to show he was not advised that the $26,500 listed as his ACF benefit was the total combined amount of the MGIB and the ACF.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014142C071108
On 27 March 2007, the Education Incentives Branch, USAHRC confirmed the ACF portion of the applicant's MGIB entitlement should have been reflected as $11,600.00 (or $311.11 in 36 equal installments). U.S. Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) message 98-080, dated 12 November 1998, increased the total amounts of the ACF (to $40,000.00 for a 4-year enlistment), effective 12 November 1998. USAREC message 98-080, dated 12 November 1998, clarified that the amount reflected was to be the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014119C071108
His DA Form 3286-66, paragraph 1a states that he was enlisting for, in addition to the 9B, the U. S. Army Station/Unit/Command/Area Enlistment Program and 9c, the U. S. Army College Fund. On 27 March 2007, the Education Incentives Branch, USAHRC confirmed the ACF portion of the applicant's MGIB entitlement should have been reflected as $2,600.00 (or $72.22 in 36 equal installments). U.S. Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) message 98-080, dated 12 November 1998, increased the total amounts of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007186C071108
Dale E. DeBruler | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 13 October 2006, the Education Incentives Branch, USAHRC confirmed the ACF portion of the applicant's MGIB entitlement should have been reflected as $4,200.00 (or $116.67 in 36 equal installments). USAREC message 98-080, dated 12 November 1998, clarified that the amount reflected was to be the total combined amount of the MGIB and the ACF.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002110C071108
Dale E. DeBruler | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant provides his DA Form 3286-66 (Statement of Understanding United States Army Incentive Enlistment Program); DA Form 3286-59 (Statement of Enlistment, United States Army Enlistment Program), and his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. There is insufficient evidence to show he was not advised that the $40,000.00...