RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:	BC-2008-00850 INDEX CODE: 112.03, 128.14 COUNSEL:	NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The Government waive the use of the Enlisted College Loan Repayment Program (ECLRP) money so that he can use his current enlistment to qualify for the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was improperly counseled as to what portion of his student loan debt was covered under the program. As a result, he made the wrong decision and signed up for a benefit program that would only provide him with $3,388.95 vs. the benefit that he could have received through the MGIB ($39,636.00).

In support of his request, applicant provided personal statements, AFPC/DPPAT letters dated 11 October 2005; 6 April
2006, and 17 April 2007, Certificate of Eligibility dated 30 May
3007, 9 MSS/DPE e-mails dated 13 February 2008, ACS letter dated
13 November 2007, and a bank account statement dated 15 December 2007.

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
An AF Form 4/3 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document), dated 20 April 2004, reflects he enlisted into the Regular Air Force for a period of four years.

An AF Form 3008 (Supplemental to Enlistment Agreement United States Air Force), dated 20 April 2004, states that under the College Loan Repayment Program (CLRP) the government will repay a designated portion of any loan he incurred that was made, insured or guaranteed, under Part B of the Higher Education Act of 1975 (Guaranteed Student Loan) or any loan under Part E of such act (National Direct Student Loan) after 1 October 1975 and before he enlisted into the Air Force. Enlistment for the CLRP ensures, provided he meet and maintain the prescribed prerequisites, that the portion or amount of loan (maximum of $10,000) may be repaid

is 33 1/3 percent of $1,500, whichever is greater (maximum of
$3,333), of the unpaid principal balance for each year of service completed. Repayment will be made only after each successful year of active duty (over a 3-year period) that he performs commencing on the date of his enlistment in the Air Force. Failure to remain on active duty during the loan repayment period will result in the remaining principal balance becoming his sole responsibility. He initialed the box stating he understood the statements above and that those statements were intended to constitute all promises and guarantees whatsoever concerning his enlistment. No other promise or representation not annexed to his enlistment contract is valid or will be honored. He was not promised anything other than what was written on this form and hereby waives any claim based upon any promise or representation not annexed to his contract. He initialed the box stating he understood that while at Basic Military Training he would automatically be enrolled in the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) and make $100.00 monthly contributions for 12 consecutive months unless he choose to disenroll. He initialed the box which stated he understood he must qualify for and enter a second term of active duty or enlistment (does not need to be a consecutive term) to complete MGIB eligibility or he will forfeit his MGIB contribution and eligibility.

A Department of Veterans Affairs letter, dated 30 May 2007, reflects the Certificate of Eligibility which entitled him to benefits for an approved program of education or training under the MGIB. He had 36 months of full time benefits. This Certificate of Eligibility was conditional on receiving his signature and certification that he had consulted his Education Service Officer (ESO) concerning his program of education. When he sent his application over the Internet, they asked him to print a copy, have him and his ESO sign it, and send it to them. If he has already done this, he didn’t need to do anything else. If he hadn’t done this, they can’t pay benefits until they have received his signature and certification that he consulted his ESO. The copy of the VA letter submitted does not reflect the member’s signature.

Three letters from HQ AFPC/DPPAT, dated 11 October 2005; 6 April 2006 and 17 April 2007, paid the annual CLRP payment to the applicant’s lender (ACS Banking Utica NY). An ACS Banking letter, dated 13 November 2007 reflects they received the final payment of his student loan. Original balance was $18,000.00 and current balance is $.00.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial. DPSIT states the applicant offers no evidence from his recruiter or basic training instructor to substantiate his claim of being misinformed on qualifying loans.  Neither does the law (10 U.S.C 2171) provide

the	authority	for	individuals	to	refund	money	paid	by	the government.

A complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20 June 2008 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1.	The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.	The application was timely filed.
3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant initialed his enlistment agreement which clearly describes the educational benefits acknowledging that he understood that he must meet the prerequisite for each educational program separately. We are not persuaded by the evidence presented that his acknowledgment was made in error nor do we find persuasive evidence that he was improperly counseled at the time of his election. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-00850 in Executive Session on 29 July 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member 
Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 28 February 2008, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 3 June 2008. Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 June 2008.