IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  25 May 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100012998 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests her Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) scholarship debt be waived and the money she paid be returned to her.  

2.  The applicant states that she was involuntarily disenrolled from the ROTC program at Purdue University without warrant and she was required to pay back her scholarship money in excess of $33,000.00.  During her time in ROTC until the present time, she met or exceeded the requirements or standards for commissioning.  The disenrollment was biased and she did not receive a response regarding the appeal packet she submitted to the U.S. Army Cadet Command (USACC).  The disenrollment notification states she had an inaptitude for military service and no leadership ability; yet, her records show differently.  She has attempted to resolve her issue through the Office of the Inspector General and the Staff Judge Advocate but she was directed to submit her contention to this Board.

3.  The applicant provides copies of 3 letters, dated 30 March, 27 May, and 
11 November 2009, to the Assistant Chief of Staff, Army National Guard (ARNG); and an index of 31 exhibits (enclosed) in support of her request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's records show she enlisted in the INARNG for a period of 8 years on 2 November 2004.  She subsequently entered active duty for training (ADT) on 17 May 2005, completed basic combat and advanced individual training, and she was awarded military occupational specialty 88M (Motor Transport Operator).  She was released from ADT on 19 September 2005 to the control of her ARNG unit.

2.  On 19 September 2005, she signed an addendum to her ARNG enlistment to participate in the ROTC program under the Simultaneous Membership Program (SMP).  She was assigned to D Company, 638th Military Intelligence (MI) Battalion, INARNG.

3.  On 27 September 2005, she executed a DA 597-3 (Army Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) Scholarship Cadet Contract) and agreed to receive pay scholarship benefits for a period of 3 academic years, including tuition and fees, books and laboratory expenses, and monthly subsistence, at Purdue University, in exchange for appointment as a Reserve of the Army upon successful completion of all academic, military, and other requirements of the Army ROTC program.

4.  Paragraph 5 (Terms of Disenrollment) of her DA Form 597-3 states that if the cadet were disenrolled from the ROTC program for any reason, the Secretary of the Army could order the cadet to reimburse the United States the dollar amount plus interest that bears the same ratio to the total cost of the scholarship financial assistance provided by the United States to the cadet as the unserved portion of active duty bears to the total period of active duty the cadet agreed to serve or was ordered to serve.  

5.  Paragraph 6 (Enlisted Active Duty Service Obligation) of her DA Form 597-3 states that if she were called to active duty for breach of contract under the provisions of paragraph 5, she would be ordered to active duty for 2 years if the breach occurred during Military Science (MS) II; for 3 years if the breach occurred during MS III; or for 4 years if the breach occurred during MS IV.

6.  On 8 March 2006, by memorandum for record (MFR), her Enlisted Instructor and her Commandant at the Department of Military Science, Purdue University, indicated the following:

* She displayed a pattern of poor attitude and lack of progress
* She fell out on numerous unit ability group runs;
* She missed physical training on some occasions with unexcused absence
* She performed the minimum on the pushup event of the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT)
* Her overall attitude was poor
* She was being uncooperative
* She displayed an unprofessional attitude
* She disobeyed directives from her Enlisted Instructor
* She displayed a behavior that was detrimental to good order and discipline and lack of mental toughness.

7.  On 4 December 2006, a member of the cadre (a captain) submitted a sworn statement wherein he stated that he was present on 29 November 2006 when her Professor of Military Science and Leadership (PMSL) counseled her and that during the counseling session, she made the following statements:

* I really hate this program
* I do not get along with most of the other cadets
* I do not feel challenged and I do not feel like I am learning
* I feel like I am training as a private, not as an officer to be
* The program feels like a waste of time
* I am not respected
* I feel like getting enough outside this program to be an officer; I am just using the ROTC program to become an officer
* I am just not a good leader here
* The MSIVs have a personal bias against me

8.  On 4 December 2006, she was counseled by her training officer regarding the PMSL's intent to initiate disenrollment proceedings against her due to inaptitude for military service by lack of general adaptability (lack of interpersonal skills and inability to work with her peers); skill (lack of qualities as a leader); hardiness (she was challenged to meet physical and mental demands of the Army); ability to learn (did not demonstrate interest or initiative to improve); and leadership abilities.  She indicated that she disagreed with the information listed on the counseling statement.

9.  On 6 December 2006, by MFR, her PMSL stated that he met with her on 4 December 2006 to inform her of the disenrollment recommendation due to her failure to show progress regarding her attitude and interpersonal skills within the program despite the counseling. 

10.  On 11 December 2006, by MFR, her PMSL stated that:

	a.  He met with several other cadre officers, noncommissioned officers, and a civilian on 29 November 2006 regarding her retention in the program.  Most recommended her disenrollment from the program. 

	b.  He met with her on 11 December 2006 and informed her of the intent to initiate disenrollment action against her.  She asked for a second chance and described her exemplary performance as a member of the INARNG.  She also described her difficulties getting along with other cadets and stated that she had some enemies among the cadets who were out to get her. 

11.  On 29 December 2006, by memorandum, the PMSL notified her that he initiated her disenrollment from the ROTC program based on her demonstrated inaptitude for military service by a lack of general adaptability, lack of skill, hardiness, and lack of leadership abilities.  She was also notified that as a scholarship cadet, if the disenrollment is approved, she could be called to active duty in an enlisted grade of E-1 or be required to repay scholarship benefits in the amount of $31,682.00 in lieu of call to active duty in fulfillment of her contractual obligations. 

12.  On 16 January 2007, she acknowledged receipt of the statement concerning her disenrollment from the ROTC program and requested a personal hearing to respond to the disenrollment action or the amount or validity of the debt.  She further declined expeditious call to active duty.

13.  On 1 February 2007, a formal hearing was conducted at Purdue University to determine the validity and the amount of her scholarship debt as stated in the disenrollment memorandum.  The board found the applicant entered into a valid ROTC contract and she received educational assistance in the amount of $31,682.00.  The board also stated that she "voluntarily failed to complete the requirement of the ROTC Cadre Contract; failure to maintain a 2.0 GPA (Grade Point Average); and failure to meet and maintain the APFT standards."  The board also found she demonstrated an inaptitude for military service and when the president of the board tried to explain how the chain of command worked, she insisted that what he said was wrong and she had the attitude that everything that went wrong was someone else's fault.  The board recommended that she:

* Not be retained in Army ROTC as a scholarship or non-scholarship cadet
* Be disenrolled from Army ROTC
* Not be released from the ROTC contractual obligation
* Not be ordered to active duty in an enlisted status 
* Be ordered to repay her debt

14.  On 8 February 2007, the PMSL approved the board's findings and recommended she be disenrolled; serve out her enlistment in the INARNG and not be required to pay her debt; and that she should not be considered for commissioning from another source.

15.  On 2 May 2007, the Commanding General (CG), USACC, ordered her disenrolled from the ROTC program in accordance with paragraph 3-43a(8) of Army Regulation (AR) 145-1 (Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps Program: Organization, Administration, and Training), due to her inaptitude for military service as demonstrated by her lack of general adaptability, skill, hardiness, and leadership abilities as evidenced by her lack of interpersonal skills and ability to work with peers, failure to show qualities as a leader, failure to meet the physical demands and mental demands of Army ROTC, and failure to demonstrate interest and initiative to improve.  He also ordered her released back to her ARNG unit to fulfill the remainder of her military service obligation and repayment of the debt in the amount of $32,132.00 for breach of contract.

16.  She was provided with an addendum to her scholarship contractual agreement with options to be ordered to active duty, repayment of the debt in a lump sum, or repayment in monthly installments.  She was also notified that failure to respond within 14 days of the disenrollment approval would result in the issuance of active duty orders or initiation of involuntary collection action.  She failed to make a choice.

17.  On 2 May 2007, the INARNG administratively reduced her from her cadet rank of sergeant back to her enlisted rank of private first class/E-3. 

18.  On 12 May 2007, she executed a written agreement for a $10,000.00 affiliation bonus in connection with her affiliation with the ARNG under the Selected Reserve Incentive program.  The bonus would be paid in one lump sum upon her assignment to a designated position, unit, or pay grade pursuant to this agreement.

19.  On 18 May 2007, by memorandum to the USACC, her battalion commander, 638th MI Battalion, requested her debt be waived and indicated that her disenrollment was biased. 

20.  On 20 May 2007, by memorandum to the USACC, she also requested the scholarship debt should be waived.  

21.  On 1 June 2007, she was reassigned from the 638th MI Battalion to the 38th Special Troop Battalion (STB), Indianapolis, IN, and she was subsequently promoted to specialist/E-4 on 30 June 2007.

22.  On 2 October 2007, she was ordered to active duty for special work.  She was honorably released from active duty on 30 September 2008 after having completed 1 year of creditable active service.


23.  On 7 March 2008, after having completed an Accelerated Officer Candidate School (AOCS), she was honorably discharged from the ARNG for the purpose of accepting an appointment as a commissioned officer in the ARNG.

24.  On 8 March 2008, she was appointed as a second lieutenant in the INARNG and she executed an oath of office on the same date.  She was assigned to the 38th STB.

25.  On 8 March 2008, she executed a second written agreement for a $10,000.00 affiliation bonus in connection with her appointment as an officer with the ARNG under the Selected Reserve in a critical officer skill.  She would receive 50% of this bonus upon completion of the Officer Basic Course and 50% on the third year anniversary of her appointment date.

26.  On 6 July 2009, she was ordered to ADT and completed the Military Intelligence Basic Officer Leadership Course.  She was released from ADT on 14 October 2009.

27.  She submitted the following documents:

	a.  A copy of a letter, dated 30 March 2009, from a lieutenant colonel (LTC) in the Alabama Army National Guard (ALARNG) to the Assistant Chief of Staff, ARNG, USACC, wherein he states that she graduated from the AOCS on 
8 March 2008 and received the highest academic rating and one of the highest APFT scores. 

	b.  A copy of a letter, dated 27 May 2009, from a recruiting operations officer in the ALARNG to the Assistant Chief of Staff, ARNG, USACC, wherein he stated that he remembers the applicant as one of the best he had the opportunity to train.  He too comments on her high academics in AOCS and her high APFT scores. 

	c.  A self-authored letter, dated 11 November 2009, to the Assistant Chief of Staff, ARNG, USACC, wherein she outlines what occurred during her ROTC experience and contends that she was involuntarily disenrolled.  She also states that ROTC officials at Purdue did not like her and gave preference to active duty personnel.  She also alleges that one of the officers continued to harass her even after her disenrollment but she had overcome all challenges as evidenced by her high academic and APFT results.



28.  During the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the National Guard Bureau on 29 March 2010.  An official recommended approval of the applicant’s request for having her scholarship recoupment be waived and the money she paid towards the recoupment returned to her.  He stated:

	a.  She signed an Army Senior ROTC Scholarship Contract on 27 September 2005 and was fully aware of the terms of disenrollment of the scholarship contract.  She was disenrolled from the ROTC program under the provisions of AR 145-1, paragraph 3-43a(13), inaptitude for military service as demonstrated by lack of general adaptability, skill, hardiness, and leadership abilities.  The official added:

		(1)  On 6 December 2005, she agreed and signed a DA form 4856 (Developmental Counseling) for the second half of the Fall Semester 2005.  She met the APFT standard, but failed the ROTC goal of 80 points for each APFT event.  She met all other ROTC requirements.

		(2)  On March 2006, her Enlisted Instructor and her Commandant issued an MFR, Subject, [Applicant's] Conduct Detrimental to the Good Order and Discipline of Purdue Army ROTC Program.  The MFR states, "There appears to be a recurring pattern of poor attitude and lack of progress displayed by [Applicant]."

		(3)  On 25 April 2006, she agreed and signed a DA form 4856.  She met the APFT standard, but was noted to work better to meet the ROTC goal of 70 points for each event.

		(4)  On 11 May 2006, she received a memorandum from her PMS congratulating her of her outstanding academic performance for earning 3.84 GPA during the spring semester 2006.  He hand wrote "[Applicant] – Well done!"

		(5)  On 4 December 2006, she disagreed and signed a DA Form 4856.  The purpose of the counseling was the initiation of disenrollment from the ROTC program for lack of demonstrated ability to adapt and lack of demonstrated leadership traits.

		(6)  On 11 December 2006, an MFR was written to record the meeting between the applicant, Enlisted Instructor and her Commandant.  The meeting was to discuss the disenrollment of the applicant.  She was informed that the disenrollment decision was based on his and the staff’s observation of her, and not on peers’ impression of her.

		(7)  On 1 February 2007, an AR 15-6 (procedures for Investigating Officers and Board of Officers) investigation regarding the disenrollment concluded.  Section V of the DA Form 1547, recommendation number 6 states, "That [Applicant] should not be ordered to repay her valid debt to the US Government comprised of advanced educational assistance received in form of scholarship benefits."

		(8)  Section VIII of the DA Form 1547, the PMOS wrote the following recommendations:  Recommend she be disenrolled; recommend she serve out her enlistment in the INARNG and not be required to pay her scholarship debt; and she should not be considered for commissioning from another source.

		(9)  A memorandum dated 2 May 2007 from the CG, USACC informed the applicant of her disenrollment from the ROTC Program, and ordered her to repay the advanced educational assistance provided by the Army for $32,132.00.  Paragraph 5 of the memorandum provided guidance to appeal/dispute the amount or the validity of the debt, and gave the applicant 14 days from the receipt of the letter to submit an explanation for the basis of the appeal.

		(10)  On 18 May 2007, her battalion commander, 638th MI Battalion, INARNG wrote a memorandum for the USACC requesting scholarship debt forgiveness for the applicant.  Paragraph 3 of the memorandum states in part, "This command strongly disagrees with this assessment and further believes that the applicant possesses the leadership qualities, mental strength, physical fitness, military bearing, and the interest to become a commissioned officer in the United States Armed Forces.  Her GPA at Purdue is 3.23, her last APFT score was 234 in November 2005, and her peer leadership evaluation was admirable.  These three areas of interest are critical in the assessment of an ROTC cadet."

		(11)  On 20 May 2007, she wrote a memorandum for the USACC requesting scholarship debt forgiveness.  Paragraph 4 of the memorandum in part states, "I feel that this assessment is not accurate, and that the disenrollment was biased and unwarranted."

		(12)  Neither she nor the commander of the 638th MI Battalion received any status from the USACC regarding the request for scholarship debt forgiveness.

	b.  There is significant evidence to support her request for having her scholarship recoupment be waived and the money she paid towards the recoupment returned to her.

		(1)  Section V of the DA Form 1547, recommends, “That [Applicant] should not be ordered to repay her valid debt to the US Government comprised of advanced educational assistance received in form of scholarship benefits."

		(2)  Section VIII of the DA Form 1547, the PMS wrote "Recommend she serve out her enlistment in the INARNG and not be required to pay her scholarship debt.”

		(3)  The applicant appealed the validity of the debt by sending a memorandum from her and her commander to the USACC, but did not receive any status regarding the appeal.

		(4)  During the 15-6 investigation, the MFRs regarding the testimony of a sergeant first class (SFC B), and captain (CPT F) were quoted incorrectly in the DA Form 1547.  SFC B stated, "[Applicant] has the qualities and abilities to be a good lieutenant," and CPT F stated, "[Applicant] is an asset to their whole organization and that she is best suited to serve the Army as an officer."  These statements were not taken into consideration.

		(5)  A letter, dated 30 March 2009, from an ALARNG LTC to the Assistant Chief of Staff of the ARNG, USACC, described the applicant as an outstanding Soldier.  She completed the Accelerated Officer Candidate School (AOCS) with the highest rating and was awarded the Institute of Excellence.  Her academic average was 100% on operations exam, 96% on tactics, and 90% on leadership. She even excelled in the APFT with an extended score of 303.

	c.  She is now commissioned in the INARNG as a first lieutenant (1LT) and continues to excel as an officer of the ARNG.  Through the continuous effort to support the outstanding Soldiers of the ARNG, the official stated that he highly recommends approval of the applicant’s request for having her scholarship recoupment be waived and the money she paid towards the recoupment returned to her.

29.  On 16 April 2010, she was provided with a copy of the advisory opinion.  On 18 April 2010, by email, she indicated that she had no further comments.

30.  AR 145-1 prescribes polices and general procedures for administering the Army’s Senior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (SROTC) Program.  

	a.  Paragraph 3-31 states the Army ROTC Scholarship Program provides financial assistance to those students who have demonstrated academic excellence and leadership potential.  The U.S. Army Scholarship Program’s purpose is to provide for the education and training of highly qualified and motivated young men and women who have a strong commitment to military service as commissioned officers

	b.  Paragraph 3-39 states a non-scholarship cadet may be disenrolled by the PMS and a scholarship cadet may be disenrolled only by the CG, USAROTCCC (U.S. Army Reserve Officers' Training Corps Cadet Command).  

	c.  Paragraph 3-39 states that a non-scholarship cadet may be disenrolled by the PMS.  A scholarship cadet may be disenrolled only by the CG, USAROTCCC.  Disenrollment authority does not include the discharge authority for SMP participants.  Nonscholarship and scholarship cadets will be disenrolled for a variety of reasons.

	d.  Paragraph 3-43a(15) states that a nonscholarship and scholarship cadet will be disenrolled due to indifferent attitude or lack of interest in military training as evidenced by frequent absences from military science classes or drill, an established pattern of shirking, failure to successfully complete an established weight control program, or similar acts.

	e.  Paragraph 3-43b states that a board of officers will be appointed by the PMS, the brigade commander, or the region commander according to the formal procedures outlined in AR 15–6 and guidance from the CG, USAROTCCC, to consider the case of each cadet considered for disenrollment for selected reasons or when deemed necessary.  Additionally, in cases where a board of officers is not appointed, the PMS will appoint an investigating officer to inquire into the case of any scholarship or advanced course cadet being considered for disenrollment, to include voluntary disenrollment or disenrollment to join another officer procurement program.  The appointing authority will determine whether the formal or informal procedures of AR 15–6 will be used.  However, in every case, the student concerned has the right to appear personally before the board or officer conducting the investigation.  The cadet is entitled to be assisted in the preparation of the hearing by any reasonable available military officer.   

31.  AR 37-104-3 (Finance Update) provides the policies and provisions for entitlements and collections of pay and allowances of military personnel.  Chapter 59 currently in effect, provides for recoupment of educational expenses, e.g., ROTC, United States Military Academy, and advanced civilian schooling under a previous agreement when obligated active duty service has not been completed. 

32.  AR 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 Army Reception Battalion and will be ordered to active duty in pay grade  E-1.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record confirms she was accepted into an Army ROTC scholarship program and that she failed to satisfy the contractual requirements of this program due to her lack of general adaptability, skill, hardiness, and leadership abilities as evidenced by her lack of interpersonal skills and ability to work with peers, failure to show qualities as a leader, failure to meet the physical demands and mental demands of Army ROTC, and failure to demonstrate interest and initiative to improve.  

2.  She was disenrolled from the ROTC program and was subsequently found in breach of her ROTC contract.  She was, therefore, offered the opportunity to be ordered to active duty, repay the debt in a lump sum, or repay the debt in monthly installments.  She was also notified that failure to respond within 14 days of the disenrollment approval would result in the issuance of active duty orders or initiation of involuntary collection action.  She failed to make a choice.  Therefore, a debt was established.

3.  The evidence of record also shows that subsequent to her disenrollment from the ROTC program at Purdue in May 2007, she continued her ARNG service in the INARNG as an enlisted Soldier and she subsequently completed an accelerated OCS program and she was appointed as a 2LT in the INARNG on 8 March 2008 and received an affiliation bonus.  She is now serving in the INARNG.

4.  The terms of the ROTC scholarship contract require a cadet to either monetarily repay his/her debt or agree to be ordered to active duty (emphasis added) as an enlisted Soldier through ROTC channels based on the needs of the Army.  She did neither.  Her current ARNG service neither satisfies the requirements of being ordered to active duty through ROTC channels in satisfaction of her ROTC contractual obligation nor does it satisfy those contractual requirements.  

5.  Each case is considered on its own merits.  In her case, not only did she fail to serve an appropriate number of years on active duty in an enlisted status, but she also received monetary benefits in the form of an affiliation bonus subsequent to her disenrollment.  Her ROTC contract called for an expeditious call to active duty through ROTC channels based on the needs of the Army.  Her subsequent appointment after her disenrollment from ROTC was not expeditious and was not at the needs of the Army.
6.  Notwithstanding the advisory opinion provided by the NGB official and notwithstanding her subsequent academic or physical achievements, she should not be allowed to profit from her failure to live up to Army standards.  The applicant breached her ROTC contract and she is not entitled to relief.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____x____  ____x____  ____x____  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.



      _______ _   _x_____   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100012998



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100012998



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1