IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 4 January 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120011174
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 remission or cancellation of his Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) debt of $37,204.50.
2. The applicant states he believes his debt should be cancelled based on the failure of the University of Massachusetts (UMASS) ROTC program to provide proper support, unfair treatment, favoritism by the cadre to certain cadets, and giving misleading advice in regard to his scholarship.
3. The applicant provides no documentary evidence in support of his request.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. On 7 October 2009, the applicant entered into a cadet contract by completing a DA Form 597-3 (Army Senior ROTC Scholarship Cadet Contract). By signing the contract, he acknowledged his understanding of the conditions of the contract and that he concurred with them. At the time the applicant entered into his ROTC contract he further acknowledged his understanding that if he failed to complete the educational requirements of his agreement or was disenrolled from the ROTC program, the Secretary of the Army or his designee could order him to active duty as an enlisted Soldier; or in lieu of being ordered to active duty, he could be required to repay financial assistance he received through the ROTC program, plus interest.
2. On 1 March 2011, the applicant was placed on ROTC probation, and on
23 March 2011, he was placed on a leave of absence pending disenrollment. The reasons cited for the action were the applicant's unexcused absences from physical training (PT) and lab and his multiple incidents of being late for military science classes.
3. On 18 July 2011, the professor of military leadership of the UMASS ROTC program issued a memorandum notifying the applicant he was initiating his disenrollment from the ROTC program based on his failure to maintain the minimum semester or cumulative grade point average (GPA) as demonstrated by his Fall 2009 and Spring 2011 semesters. He further indicated the applicant had been counseled and placed on an administrative suspension for Spring 2011 after receiving a 1.7 GPA. The professor of military leadership also stated he was initiating the applicant's disenrollment for his indifferent attitude and lack of interest in military training as evidenced by his frequent unexcused absences from PT.
4. On 5 August 2011, the applicant acknowledged the notification of disenrollment of 18 July 2011.
5. On 8 November 2011, a board of officers published its findings and recommendations regarding the applicant's disenrollment from the ROTC program. The applicant elected not to attend the hearing based on his being at his home of record in Nevada. The board of officers, after considering all the available evidence, recommended the applicant be disenrolled from the ROTC program and that the applicant be required to repay his ROTC scholarship debt. The board of officers also recommended the applicant not be ordered to active duty.
6. On 8 November 2011, the executive officer of the UMASS ROTC completed an investigation into the disenrollment board of officers proceedings completed on the applicant. Based on his findings, the executive officer recommended the applicant not be retained in ROTC either as a scholarship or non-scholarship cadet; that the applicant should be disenrolled from ROTC and not released from his ROTC contract; that the applicant should be ordered to active duty in an enlisted status; that the applicant should be ordered to repay his valid debt to the U.S. Government (if not allowed to enlist) comprised of advanced educational assistance received in the form of scholarship benefits.
7. There is no evidence indicating the applicant has enlisted in any branch of the U.S. Armed Forces subsequent to his ROTC disenrollment.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's request that his ROTC debt be forgiven because his disenrollment was unjust has been carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2. The evidence shows the applicant entered into a valid ROTC scholarship contract on 7 October 2009. It also shows he failed to meet the requirements of the contract by not maintaining the required 2.0 GPA. In addition, the applicant displayed an indifferent attitude and lack of interest in military training disinterested attitude toward military service classes and had a history of conduct and performance related issues as evidenced by his repeated absence from PT and lateness for military science classes.
3. Absent any evidence of record or independent evidence provided by the applicant that would support a conclusion that there was some error or injustice related to the disenrollment process, it appears the applicant's disenrollment processing was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulatory guidance.
4. In addition, there is no evidence the applicant has attempted to enlist in any branch of the U.S. Armed Forces subsequent to his ROTC disenrollment. As a result, there appears to be no equity basis for relief.
5. In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the applicant's requested 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) AR20120011174
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120011174
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120018186
The applicant submitted a DD Form 597-3, dated 31 August 2009, which states in: a. paragraph 3c(1) (Cadet Obligation), cadets understand and agree they will incur an active duty and/or reimbursement obligation after the first day of their military science II year (sophomore year) if they are a 3, 4, or 5 year scholarship recipient; and b. paragraph 5 (Terms of Disenrollment), he understood and agreed that once he became obligated and was disenrolled from the ROTC program for breach of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013928
The evidence shows the applicant's disenrollment was due to a breach of the ROTC contract based on his failure to maintain a minimum semester academic GPA of 2.0 on a 4.0 scale and his indifferent attitude as evidenced by frequent absences from military training. However, there is no evidence of record and counsel provided no evidence that shows the applicant was erroneously disenrolled from the ROTC Program. Since it appears the applicant failed to maintain a GPA of 2.0 for each semester...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026488
e. A letter from the applicant addressed to "To Whom It May Concern," dated 4 November 2009, shows the applicant requested disenrollment from the Army ROTC Program because she could not continue to pursue her nursing degree under her Army ROTC contract because she was not eligible for acceptance in the JMU nursing program. The applicant contends that her ROTC scholarship debt should be forgiven because she was not fully informed by the ROTC PMS or any ROTC cadre member of the requirement to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110024320
Counsel contends that the applicant is deserving of relief because he was denied due process because: * His absences were due to extended illness rather than an indifferent attitude * He has always cared about his military training and never shirked his duties * Any miscommunication was the result of the cadre's failure to actively involve cadets from other campuses * He was never provided an impartial administrative hearing to determine whether he should remain in the ROTC program * He was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010440
On 30 April 2008, the Professor of Military Science, U.S. Army ROTC Battalion, UND, recommended the applicant be disenrolled from the ND ROTC program because she had not been admitted into her upper division nursing program at Saint Mary's College. It stated that the applicant was disenrolled from the ROTC program under the provisions of Army Regulation 145-1, paragraphs 3-43a(16). The applicant understood her academic standing and requirements of the nursing program throughout her time in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015349
The applicant's DA Form 597-3 (Army Senior ROTC Scholarship Cadet Contract) is not in her available records for review, but records reflect and the applicant contends she received a 4-year ROTC scholarship while enrolled in the ROTC Program and attending Salve Regina University, a partner with the University of Rhode Island ROTC Program. On 29 March 2012, the Commander, Headquarters, 2nd Brigade, U.S. Army Cadet Command, recommended the applicant's immediate disenrollment and that she be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003589
She was also notified that as a scholarship cadet, if the disenrollment was 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 $21,605.00 in lieu of call to active duty in fulfillment of her contractual obligations. On 24 January 2008, a Cadet Action Request was initiated by her PMS strongly recommending disenrollment as she requested and that she pay back her scholarship through financial means. On 5 May...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013300
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The reasons cited were due to her failure of the MS III course, failure to pass the CWST, and a drop in her physical fitness scores. On 30 August 2011 and again on 25 October 2012, the applicant's ROTC commanding officer recommended disenrollment due to failure to maintain academic standards in her MS class which resulted in a breach of her contract.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016413
She was ordered to active duty for a period of 400 days in support of OEF on 2 January 2013. As a result of her disenrollment, the applicant incurred an ROTC scholarship debt of $22,257.00, which she acknowledged was correct and valid. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant declined to be expeditiously called to active duty upon disenrollment from the ROTC program in lieu being required to repay scholarship benefits.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062518C070421
Counsel states that the applicant heard nothing further from his ROTC unit or the United States Army until 15 October 1991 when, without further notice, hearing or counsel, he was presented with amended findings and amended recommendations from the disenrollment board which concluded that the applicant should be disenrolled from the ROTC program for other than willful evasion or voluntary breach of the terms of his ROTC contract. He was still enrolled at Pennsylvania State, was taking less...