RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        28 November 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060003500


      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. Beverly A. Young              |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John Meixell                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Susan Powers                  |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Dennis Phillips               |     |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 his Reserve Officers’ Training
Corps (ROTC) debt be waived.

2.  The applicant states that he was previously enrolled and contracted as
an Army ROTC 3-year scholarship cadet, but he was disenrolled for academic
reasons in 2000.  He went on to get his degree and had begun repaying his
debt for the scholarship through the Defense Finance and Accounting Service
(DFAS) Denver Center as agreed.  He states that the [ROTC] debt was over
$17,000 and was incurred because of his obligation to get commissioned or
to repay the debt. He states he joined the New Jersey Army National Guard
as an officer candidate and was commissioned on 21 August 2005.  He states
he has been on active duty in one form or another since 15 August 2004.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of the announcement of his Federal
recognition.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  After having had prior service in the U.S. Army Reserve, the applicant
enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (ROTC Control Group) on an unknown date.


2.  The applicant’s DA Form 597-3 (Army Senior ROTC Scholarship Cadet
Contract), which would have been in the version dated June 1995, is not
available.

3.  Paragraph 7b of the applicant’s DA Form 597-3 would have stated that if
the cadet were disenrolled from the ROTC Program for any reason, the
Secretary of the Army could order him to reimburse the United States
through repayment of an amount of money, plus interest, equal to the entire
amount of financial assistance paid by the United States for his advanced
education from the commencement of the contractual agreement to the date of
his disenrollment or refusal to accept a commission.  Or, the cadet could
be ordered to active duty for not more than four years.

4.  Paragraph 12 of the applicant’s DA Form 597-3 would have stated that
the cadet understood and agreed that if he voluntarily or because of
misconduct failed to begin or failed to complete any period of active duty
that he may have incurred under the contract, he would be required to
reimburse the United States an amount of money, plus interest, that is
equal to or bore the same ratio to the total cost of the financial
assistance provided him as the unserved portion of such duty bore to the
total period of such duty he was obligated to serve.
5.  Paragraph 8 of the applicant’s DA Form 597-3 would have stated that if
he/she were called to active duty for breach of contract, he/she would be
ordered to active duty 2 years if the breach occurred during Military
Science II; for 3 years if the breach occurred during Military Science III,
or for 4 years if the breach occurred during Military Science IV.

6.  Department of the Army, Department of Military Science, University of
Nebraska-Lincoln, Orders Number BNE-NL-04-01, dated 25 July 2000,
discharged the applicant from the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (ROTC)
effective 25 July 2000.  He was disenrolled from the ROTC program for
breach of contract.  The additional instructions on the discharge orders
indicate the breach of contract occurred during Military Science IV and
that he was still responsible to reimburse the U.S. Army for any monies
spent in his behalf.

7.  The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 20 May 2004 in the
rank of E-4 for a period of three years.  He was ordered to active duty
training (ADT) on 15 June 2004 and was released from ADT on 29 December
2004 and transferred back to his Army National Guard unit.

8.  The applicant was discharged from the Army National Guard and as a
Reserve of the Army on 20 August 2005, for appointment as a commissioned or
warrant officer.

9.  He was appointed as a second lieutenant in the Army National Guard on
21 August 2005.

10.  In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained
from the U.S. Army Cadet Command.  The opinion stated that the terms of the
scholarship contract required that a cadet repay the debt monetarily or
agree to be ordered to active duty through ROTC channels based on the needs
of the Army.  The opinion stated the applicant was offered these options on
20 June 2000 after being disenrolled from the ROTC program for breach of
contract.  Since he did not elect active duty through this Command, a debt
was established with
DFAS-Denver on 25 July 2000.  The opinion further stated that based on the
applicant’s DD Form 149, he was assigned to the Nebraska National Guard.
His active duty service was not the result of being ordered to active duty
through ROTC channels in satisfaction of his ROTC contractual obligation.
The opinion stated that the applicant’s decision to breach the terms of his
ROTC contract and his enlistment in the National Guard were voluntary
actions.  The opinion further stated that his voluntary enlistment in the
National Guard was not an authorized remedy for debt repayment under the
terms of the ROTC contract.  This office recommended that his voluntary
enlistment not reduce the amount that he was required to reimburse the
United States for his advanced educational assistance.
11.  A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for
comment or rebuttal.  However, he did not respond within the allotted
timeframe.

12.  Army Regulation 135-210 prescribes policies and procedures for
ordering individual Soldiers of the Army National Guard of the United
States and the U.S. Army Reserve to active duty during peacetime.  In
pertinent part, it states that former ROTC cadets, when ordered to active
duty, will be ordered to report to the U.S. Army Reception Battalion and
will be ordered to active duty in pay grade E-1.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was disenrolled from the ROTC program for breach of
contract in July 2000.  It appears that he did not elect to serve on active
duty in lieu of repayment of the debt; therefore, a debt was incurred.

2.  Although his DA Form 597-3 is not available, the applicant states that
his ROTC debt was over $17,000.  His discharge orders from the ROTC program
on 25 July 2000 indicate that the breach of contract occurred during
Military Science IV, which required him to serve 4 years of active duty
service in lieu of repayment of the debt.

3.  The applicant served as an enlisted Soldier in the Army National Guard
from May 2004 to August 2005 and was commissioned in the Army National
Guard on 21 August 2005.  Since the applicant could not have completed his
4 years of active duty as required by his ROTC scholarship contract, he is
still obligated to repay the debt.

4.  Therefore, there is no error or injustice that exists in this case and
there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

JM______  SP______  DP______  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.




                                  John Meixell___________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060003500                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061128                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |128.1000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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