RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  8 February 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060002857 


	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.



	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 $50,000 Army College Fund (ACF) kicker.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, his contract states he would receive $50,000 for the ACF.  He states, in effect, that nowhere in his contract does it state that the ACF and the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) are a combined value.  

3.  The applicant provides: his DA Form 3286-66 (Statement of Understanding United States Army Incentive Enlistment Program); his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); and college transcripts.

	a.  His DD Form 4/1-3 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document).

	b.  His DD Form 1961/1-4 (Record of Military Processing).

	c.  His USAREC (US Army Recruiting Command) Form 1150 (Statement of Understanding).

	d.  His Statement for Enlistment – Delayed Enlistment Program.

	e.  His DA Form 3286-63 (Statement for Enlistment – US Army Training Enlistment Program).

	f.  His DA Form 3286-66 (Statement of Understanding – US Army Incentive Enlistment Program).

	g.  His DA Form 3286-67 (Statement of Understanding – Army Policy).

	h.  USAREC Form 1127-E-R (Supplement to DA Form 3286-67).

	i.  USAREC Form 1150 (Addendum to DD Form 1966 Series).

	j.  DD Form 2366 (Montgomery GI Bill Act of 1984).

	k.  Reservation Form.


CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  On 9 January 2001, the applicant enlisted in the Delayed Entry Program.  His DA Form 3286-59 shows he was enlisting for the U. S. Army Training Enlistment Program, the U. S. Army Incentive Enlistment Program (Cash Bonus $2,000), and the ACF for $50,000.  His DD Form 2366 shows he was enrolled in the MGIB and the ACF for $50,000.

2.  On 7 June 2001, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 5 years.  His DA Form 3286-66 (Statement of Understanding United States Army Incentive Enlistment Program) states he was enlisting for the U. S. Army Training Enlistment Program, the Seasonal Bonus (Cash Bonus $2,000), and for the ACF. He initialed paragraph 3, which stated that, if his incentive in paragraph 1a was the ACF, he would be awarded the amounts indicated below as they apply to the term for which he was enlisting:  5 years - up to $50,000.  His DD Form 1966/3 shows he was enlisting for the U. S. Army Training Enlistment Program, the Seasonal Bonus (Cash Bonus $2,000), and for the ACF $50,000.

3.  The applicant completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91K (Medical Lab Specialist).

4.  The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 5 June 2006 after completing 5 years of creditable active service.

5.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was provided by the Chief, Education Incentives Branch, US Army Human Resources Command.  That office recommended approval, noting the applicant’s enlistment contract reflects $50,000.  That included the basic rate of the MGIB.  When the applicant entered active duty on 7 June 2001 for a 5-year enlistment, the veterans’ rate for basic MGIB benefits was $23,400 for a 3-year or greater obligation.  Therefore, his ACF portion of his combined benefits was $26,600, which equates to $738.89 per month for up to 36 months worth of benefits.  However, many Soldiers entering active duty erroneously were led to believe that they will receive the MGIB rate plus the dollar amount as indicated on the enlistment contract.

6.  A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment or rebuttal.  He concurred with the opinion.


7.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program), Table 9-4 of the version dated 28 February 1995 (the version in effect at the time of the applicant's enlistment), explains the ACF.  It states applicants for enlistment will be advised of the following:  The ACF provides additional educational assistance in addition to that earned under the GI Bill.  The money earned is deposited in the Soldier's Department of Veterans' Affairs account.  Normally, the funds will be dispersed to the participant in 36 equal monthly installments while the person is enrolled in an approved program of education.  

8.  U. S. Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) message 98-080 dated 12 November 1998 increased the total amounts of the ACF (to $50,000 for a 
5-year enlistment) effective 12 November 1998.  This message stated, in part, "No attempt will be made to describe or provide applicants a breakdown of the MONTGOMERY GI BILL AND ARMY COLLEGE FUND amounts.  The amounts reflected above are the total combined amounts of the MGIB and ACF authorized as of 12 Nov 98."

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) administrative regularity regarding the regulatory requirement for applicants for enlistment to be properly advised of the ACF is presumed.

3.  Army Regulation 601-210, Table 9-4 explains the ACF and states applicants for enlistment will be advised the ACF provides additional educational assistance in addition to that earned under the MGIB.  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.  The applicant enlisted in January 2002.  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.

4.  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 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
AR20060002857
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
20070208
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
103.0000
2.
112.0000
3.

4.

5.

6.