IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  11 July 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120022193 


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 the remission of her Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) debt in the amount of $12,690.50. 

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  In August 2009, the Wright State University (WSU) Army ROTC Battalion cadre, to include the commander, executive officer, training noncommissioned officer (NCO), and the human resources assistant, convened a meeting with her to discuss retaining her within the ROTC program beyond her first year despite the fact she was academically below the acceptable ROTC academic standing.  At that point she was in her first year and could withdraw from the program without obligation to repay the scholarship.  They promised her that if she continued in the ROTC program and was not able to maintain her grade point average (GPA) she would not be required to repay the debt.  She believes it was their hope, as it was her hope, that she would improve her GPA, stay in the program, and not have to contend with repayment.  

	b.  In October 2009, WSU Army ROTC disenrolled her from all classes due to her failure to maintain a term GPA above 2.0.  At that point she was still under no obligation to repay the scholarship funding since she was still in her first year. The ROTC staff subsequently re-enrolled her after promising her that if she wasn't able to sufficiently improve her GPA in the next quarter, they would ensure she would not have to repay the scholarship funding.  

	c.  In a memorandum, dated 12 January 2010, the battalion commander, Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) RDW, stated she may have to repay the entire scholarship debt.  After receipt of the memorandum, she appealed three times to the executive officer by email but received no response.  When she contacted LTC RDW by telephone he advised her that the matter was out of his hands and she should appeal to Headquarters (HQ), U.S. Army Cadet Command so she did so.  The response she received was that the debt was valid.  

	d.  She resubmitted an appeal to HQ, U.S. Army Cadet Command and provided additional information to substantiate her assertion that WSU Army ROTC Battalion took extraordinary actions outside their normal procedures to retain her in the ROTC program.  She was dropped from all classes for not maintaining the minimum GPA and the ROTC cadre reversed this action, reenrolled her by authorizing the use of scholarship funds.  She was told she would not have to repay any monies if she was unable to bring her GPA up to the required level.

	e.  She received a letter, dated 12 April 2012, from the Deputy Chief of Staff, HQ, U.S. Army Cadet Command, and was advised a debt had been established for her with the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS).  A DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) was attached to the letter.

3.  The applicant provides a DA Form 597-3 (Army Senior ROTC Scholarship Cadet Contract), a DA Form 5315 (U.S. Army Advanced Education Financial Assistance Record), six memoranda, orders, a letter, five pages of academic account records, and a page titled WSU History.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (ROTC) on 20 November 2008.  Her DA Form 597-3 shows the date her education commenced on 8 September 2008 with a completion date of 9 June 2012 and her academic major was nurse (general).

2.  Paragraph 1 (Department of the Army Agreements) of her DA Form 597-3 states she would be paid scholarship benefits for a period of 4 academic years.  Paragraph 5 (Terms of Disenrollment) states that she understood and agreed that once she became obligated and was disenrolled from the ROTC program for breach of contractual terms the Secretary of the Army or his designee could order her to active duty as an enlisted Soldier for a specified period of time; or in lieu of being ordered to active duty, she could be required to repay the dollar amount, plus interest, equal to the entire amount of the financial assistance paid by the United States to the cadet. 

3.  On 17 December 2009, her Professor of Military Science (PMS) notified her by memorandum that she was being placed on administrative suspension, effective 4 January 2010, due to her failure to maintain a GPA of 2.0 or better for the quarter, or a cumulative GPA of 2.0 or better, and her failure to make adequate progress toward a degree without sufficient cause.  She was further informed that she should make an appointment to meet with her instructor for ROTC contract counseling and to provide a new planned academic worksheet.

4.  On 20 January 2010, her PMS notified her by memorandum of the initiation of disenrollment action from the ROTC program based on her breach of contract due to her withdrawal from WSU and her failure to maintain a minimum GPA of 2.0.  She was informed she could request a hearing by a board of officers or an investigating officer to hear her case.  She was further informed that as a scholarship cadet, she could be called to active duty in an enlisted rank/grade of private/E-1 or required to repay scholarship benefits in the amount of $12,690.50.

5.  On 20 January 2010, she acknowledged receipt of the notification, waived her right to a hearing, and declined a call to active duty within 60 days after completion of her current projected graduation date, and declined an expeditious call to active duty. 

6.  On 10 May 2010, her ROTC commander submitted a recommendation to the U.S. Army Cadet Command, that the applicant be disenrolled from the ROTC program and be required to repay her scholarships monies in the amount of $12,690.50.  She (the commander) stated the applicant was a 4-year scholarship cadet and she had withdrawn from WSU for failing to maintain a 2.0 GPA.  She further stated the applicant had last attended WSU during the Fall 2009 quarter.

7.  On 10 June 2010, she was notified by the U.S. Army Cadet Command that she was disenrolled from the ROTC program, would be discharged from the USAR Control Group (ROTC), and owed a debt of $12,690.50. 

8.  Orders 180-03, dated 29 June 2010, issued by the ROTC Battalion, WSU, Dayton, OH, discharged her from the USAR Control Group (ROTC) effective 29 June 2010.

9.  On 16 July 2010, she appealed to the U.S. Army Cadet Command and requested waiver of repayment of her ROTC scholarship debt that was paid to her in the first year of the program.  In her request she stated that the ROTC cadre encouraged her to stay in the program and had stated they would advocate on her behalf not to have to repay the entire scholarship amount.  She also stated when she was notified disenrollment action was being initiated the cadre advised her a board would not resolve the issue so she should waive her right to the board.  In addition, they promised her they would request that she would not have to repay the scholarship amount.

10.  The U.S. Army Cadet Command conducted an inquiry into her allegations.  In a memorandum to the U.S. Army Cadet Command, dated 6 October 2010, from the WSU, ROTC Battalion, Dayton, OH, the PMS stated the applicant's statement that implies the ROTC cadre led her to believe she would not have a financial reimbursement obligation is incorrect.  She was counseled in a group environment for the purpose of ensuring her options were clear and in accordance with applicable regulations.  She was counseled that a board would be necessary for the department to recommend suspension of any financial obligation.  In addition, the minimum GPA for the upper-division standing of the nursing program is about 3.4.  When it became obvious her ability to progress as a nursing student was in jeopardy, she was counseled on her options.  She received encouragement, mentoring, and multiple counseling while a cadet, but at no time was she advised to waive board action.

11.  The U.S. Army Cadet Command subsequently forwarded her appeal to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, for a determination concerning the validity of her debt.  

12.  In a memorandum to the Commander, U.S. Army Cadet Command, dated 15 November 2011, the Assistant Secretary of the Army stated the applicant's appeal was reviewed, it was determined her debt was valid, and he directed she be ordered to repay educational expenses in the amount of $12,690.50 with interest, if applicable.  He further directed the commander take appropriate action to notify DFAS to pursue collection in that amount.

13.  On 6 January 2012, the U.S. Amy Cadet Command notified the applicant her debt in the amount of $12,650.50 was valid and she could elect one of the repayment options outlined in an enclosed addendum.

14.  Army Regulation 145-1 (Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps Program: Organization, Administration and Training) prescribes policies and general procedures for administering the Army’s Senior ROTC Program.  Paragraph 
3-43, in part, states that scholarship cadets will be disenrolled for a breach of contract.  Breach is defined as any act, performance, or nonperformance on the part of a student that breaches the terms of the contract regardless of whether the act, performance, or nonperformance was done with specific intent to breach the contract or whether the student knew that the act, performance, or nonperformance breaches the contract.  Paragraph 3-43a states a cadet may be disenrolled for failure to maintain a minimum academic GPA of 2.0.

15.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 2005(f) states that the Secretary concerned shall require, as a condition to the Secretary providing financial assistance under section 2107a (financial assistance program for specially selected members:  Army Reserve and Army National Guard; i.e., ROTC) of this title to any person, that such person enter into an agreement described in subsection (a).  In addition to the requirements of clauses (1) through (4) of such subsection, any agreement required by this subsection shall provide (1) that if such person fails to complete the education requirements the Secretary shall have the option to order such person to reimburse the United States in the manner provided for without the Secretary first ordering such person to active duty as provided for under clause (2) of such subsection.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant enlisted in an ROTC program.  She agreed if she were disenrolled from the ROTC program for any reason, she could be ordered to repay her scholarship debt.  The evidence of record also shows she failed to satisfy the contractual requirements of this program due to her failure to maintain academic standards and her withdrawal from WSU.  Therefore, she was found in breach of her ROTC contract and was accordingly notified of her disenrollment from the program.

2.  Her contention that ROTC cadre told her she would not have to repay her debt if she stayed in the program is noted.  However, the evidence of record contradicts this contention.  Regardless, ROTC personnel do not have the authority to forgive an ROTC debt.

3.  She entered into a valid contract and received educational assistance but failed to complete the requirements of this contract.  She was recommended for disenrollment and payment of her debt.  She was subsequently disenrolled from the ROTC program due to her failure to meet academic standards and her withdrawal from WSU.  She breached her ROTC contract and the evidence of record confirms her ROTC debt in the amount of $12,690.50 is valid.

4.  In view of the foregoing, she is not entitled to the 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)                                         AR20120022193





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120022193



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1