RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  13 February 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060006059 


	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.




Director



Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Chairperson


Member


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 full $40,000 Army College Fund (ACF) entitlement in addition to the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefit promised him during his enlistment processing.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that nowhere on the enlistment contract forms he signed does it state that he is not entitled to both the $40,000 ACF benefit and full MGIB benefits.  He indicates that Albany Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) officials and Fort Stewart, Georgia education advisors, explained to him that upon completion of his active duty service contractual agreement, he would receive the total sum of the ACF, MGIB, and MGIB Kicker divided by thirty six on a monthly basis.  He further states that his contract, recruiting officials, and educational personnel from Fort Stewart, all left him with the impression he would receive a total of $82,624 dollars for education benefits, and he is now being told his total education benefit will be only be $59,200.00.  He asks to be paid the difference.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application:  Self-Authored Statement; Enlistment Contract (DD Form 4/1, DD Form 4/2, DD Form 4/3); Record of Military Processing-Armed Forces of the United States 
(DD Form 1966/1, DD Form 1966/2, DD Form 1966/3); Statement of Understanding-Army Policy (USAREC Form 1150); Statement of Enlistment 
(DA Form 3286-59); Statement of Enlistment-Station of Choice (DA Form 3286-64);Statement of Understanding-United States Army Incentive Enlistment Program (DA Form 3286-66); Statement of Enlistment-MGIB/ACF (DA Form 3286-67); Statement of Enlistment-Supplemental (USAREC Form 1127); Contractual Security Clearance Application; MGIB Act of 1984 (DD Form 2366); Certificate of Birth; High School Diploma; Driver’s License; Social Security Card; and Report of Medical Examination (DD Form 2808). 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) Delayed Entry Program (DEP) on 23 June 2001.  Paragraph 32a of the DD Form 1966/3 prepared at the time states that in addition to the United States Army Training Enlistment Program and Cash Bonus, he was enlisting for an ACF incentive of $40,000, and he was enrolled in the MGIB on 23 June 2001, as required for eligibility of the ACF incentive.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years and entered active duty on 6 September 2001, and on 30 April 2006, he was honorably released from active duty upon the completion of his required active service.
3.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was provided by the Education Incentives Branch, United States 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, and that the DA Form 3286-66 does not clarify this information and is blatantly misleading to the member entering active duty.  It further indicates that when the applicant entered active duty on 6 September 2001, the veteran's rate for basic MGIB benefits was $23,400.00 for a 4-year term of service obligation; therefore, the ACF portion of his combined benefit was $16,600.00, which equates to $461.11 per month for 36 months.  Many Soldiers entering active duty are erroneously led to believe they will receive the MGIB rate plus the ACF dollar amount indicated on the enlistment contract.  USAHRC recommends approval of the applicant's request, and that the compensation granted be based on the information provided in his paperwork, and that any authorized compensation be sent directly to the applicant.  The applicant concurred with this advisory opinion on 26 September 2006.  

4.  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 MGIB.  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.  

5.  United States Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) Message 98-080, dated 12 November 1998, increased the total amounts of the ACF, effective 
12 November 1998.  This message stated, in pertinent part, that "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 were carefully considered and 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.  

2.  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.  

3.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant enlisted in June 2001, 
and there is insufficient evidence to show he was not advised that the $40,000, listed as his ACF benefit was the total combined amount of the MGIB and the ACF.  Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to grant the requested relief.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___HOF _  __WFC__  __DED__  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.  




_____Hubert O. Fry______
          CHAIRPERSON


INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060006059
SUFFIX

RECON
NA
DATE BOARDED
2007/02/13
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
2006/04/30
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-200
DISCHARGE REASON
Completion of Required Service
BOARD DECISION
DENIAL
REVIEW AUTHORITY
Mr. Schwartz
ISSUES         1.
103.0100
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.