RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        28 SEPTEMBER 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060003103


      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. Rene’ R. Parker               |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Linda Simmons                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Paul Smith                    |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Alice Muellerweiss            |     |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 his student loans be paid under the Student
Loan Repayment Program (SLRP).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that prior to his enlistment, he was
told by his recruiter to bring in all copies of his promissory notes for
review.  After review of his promissory notes, the applicant said his
recruiter stated that all his loans were covered under the SLRP.  He was
also instructed to bring the copies with him on the date he shipped so that
the promissory notes could be faxed to the Military Entrance Processing
Station (MEPS).  The applicant recalled his counselor confirming the exact
amount of money the Army was to pay for his student loans. He said he
disenrolled from the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) and choose a military
occupation specialty he did not want just to qualify for the SLRP.  The
applicant concluded that he feels as though he was deliberately lied to and
his enlistment into the Army was under false pretense.

3.  The applicant provides his enlistment documents, letter from the Chief,
Education Incentive Branch, and DD Forms 2475 (DOD Education Repayment
Program (LRP) Annual Application) with copies of promissory notes.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s military records show that on 9 June 2004, he enlisted
in the Regular Army for 5 years in the pay grade of E-3.  A Statement of
Understanding United States Army Incentive Enlistment Program prepared
during his enlistment processing, confirms that the applicant enlisted in
the Regular Army for a Cash Bonus and the LRP incentive option.

2.  The LRP provisions in the Statement of Enlistment required, in
pertinent part, that the applicant acknowledge and understand that only
certain loans qualify for the LRP.  Loans which qualify for his program
includes those which are made, insured or guaranteed under Part B of the
Higher Education Act of 1975 (Guaranteed Student Loan) or any loan under
Part E of such act (National Direct Student Loan) after 1 October 1975 and
before he enlist into the Regular Army.

3.  The applicant also understood that under the Army's Student Loan
Repayment Program, the Army would not repay student loans in excess of
$65,000.00 regardless of the amount of his student loans.  He further
understood that he was required to make the interest payments on his
student loan during his first year of enlistment.  In addition, he
understood that he must bring copies of all his student loan promissory
notes when he reported to the MEPS for his active duty ship date.

4.  As an incentive, the applicant was also eligible to receive a
$10,000.00 cash bonus.  He understood that the LRP was contingent on his
disenrollment from the GI Bill.  Disenrollment must be accomplished at the
time he entered active duty.  If he failed to complete the disenrollment
portion of the DD Form 2366, he would not be eligible for the LRP and would
be automatically enrolled in the GI Bill.  The applicant signed his
statement of enlistment verifying that he understood “all promises and
guarantees whatsoever concerning my enlistment.”

5.  On 2 February 2004, the applicant signed DD Form 2366 disenrolling from
the MGIB.

6.  On 9 March 2005, the Acting Chief for the Education Incentives and
Counseling Branch, determined that based upon the information provided by
Sallie Mae Servicing Corporation (SMSC) the applicant’s loans totaling
$27,030.20 did not qualify for repayment under the LRP.  The Acting Chief
justified her decision by stating the applicant’s loans were Private Loans
which were not made, insured or guaranteed under Title IV, Part B, D, or E
of the Higher Education Act.

7.  On 6 March 2006, the Chief, Education Incentives Branch verified that
the applicant had qualifying Stafford Loans.  The remaining original unpaid
principal was verified as $13,825.00.

8.  The DD Forms 2475, provided by the applicant with copies of his
promissory notes, shows that he submitted seven applications for repayment
of loans to SMSC totaling $27,030.20.

9.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment
Program) prescribes eligibility criteria governing the enlistment of
persons, with or without prior service, into the Regular Army and the U. S.
Army Reserve.  Chapter 9 (Enlistment Programs/Options) states that these
programs/options are designed to merge valid Army requirements with
personal desires.

10.  Army Regulation 601-210, Table 9-4, contains guidance on enlistment
option program 9C (Bonus/Army College Fund/Loan Repayment Program).  Table
9-4 provides program processing procedures that require specific counseling
and administrative actions in connection with processing members enlisting
with the LRP incentive.  In addition, Line 7 of Table 9-4 requires the
guidance counselor to verify that the applicant has qualifying loans if
enlisting for the LRP, to advise the applicant if any loan is not eligible,
and to have the applicant acknowledge same in the remarks section of the DD
Form 1966 series.

11.  U. S. Army Recruiting Command Regulation 621-1 (Montgomery GI Bill,
Army College Fund, and Loan Repayment Program), current version effective
30 November 1998, paragraph 4-4a, states that applicants for the LRP are no
longer authorized to ship without documents or verification of eligible
loans.

12.  Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1552, the law which provides for the
Board, states that “The Secretary may pay, from applicable current
appropriations, a claim for the loss of pay, allowances, compensation,
emoluments, or other pecuniary benefits, or the repayment of a fine or
forfeiture, if, as a result of correcting a record under this section, the
amount is found to be due the claimant on account of his or another’s
service in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps or Coast Guard, as the
case may be.”

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  It is apparent the applicant’s student loans did not meet the criteria
established by law and regulation to qualify for repayment by the Army
under the SLRP.  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.  The applicant’s enlistment contract established a contractual agreement
between the applicant and the Army.  The fact that the applicant
disenrolled from the GI Bill further supports the applicant's contention
that he believed his student loans would be repaid under the agreement
included in his enlistment contract.

3.  In addition, governing regulations require that Army Guidance
Counselors 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.
Finally, counselors must add entries to the enlistment contract and/or
associated documents confirming this verification of option and incentive
eligibility and/or counseling on ineligibility prior to a member departing
for active duty.  In this case, counselors failed to properly document the
ineligibility of the applicant's loan.



4.  In view of the facts of this case, it appears that the applicant
entered into an erroneous contract with the Army.  The recruiting personnel
failed to follow established regulatory guidelines in connection with this
enlistment processing. Based on the failure on the part of government
officials to follow its own regulations during the applicant's enlistment
processing, it is appropriate to rectify the resultant injustice at this
time.

5.  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 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 or the repayment or default of the loan,
the Army Board for Correction of Military Records may pay the loan, at its
sole discretion, in accordance with Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552."
This would allow the Board to invoke that provision and pay the Alternative
Education Loans.

BOARD VOTE:

___LS___  ___PS __  ___AM__  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends
that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be
corrected by amending the applicant's Statement for Enlistment United
States Army Enlistment Program 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 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 or the repayment or
default of the loan, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records may
pay the loan, at its sole discretion, in accordance with Title 10, U.S.
Code, section 1552."

2.  Further, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) shall remit
payment in the amount of $27,030.20 to the applicant as a result of this
correction.  If required, the applicant will submit the appropriate
evidence (promissory notes, etc.) to the Defense Finance and Accounting
Service.




                                  _____ Linda Simmons_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060003103                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060928                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |103.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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