PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:     
                                 AKA:    

	BOARD DATE:           27 September 2001                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2001057777

	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.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Walter Avery		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. Eric N. Andersen		Member	
	Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaughnessy		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that the Army repay her loans under the Loan Repayment Program (LRP) or enroll her in the GI Bill.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that she joined the Army with the promise that her student loans would be paid under the LRP.  During enlistment processing, she was advised that she must choose between the GI Bill and the LRP; therefore, she declined the GI Bill and contracted for the LRP.  She later learned that a qualification for the LRP was an Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) score of “50”.  Her AFQT score of “32” made her ineligible for the LRP.  She asserts that the Army’s recruiters allowed her to sign up for a program that she was not entitled to.  After she left the Regular Army she attempted to enlist in the US Army Reserve (USAR) for the LRP.  She enlisted in the USAR, but could not receive the LRP option because her loans were in default.  A rule of the LRP program is the Army can not pay loans in default.  These defaulted student loans destroyed her credit and caused stress in her marriage.  After leaving active duty and joining the USAR she attended college for two years and paid the tuition out of her own pocket.   She asks that the Army live up to its end of the bargain.

4.  In support of her request, she submits a copy of requests for payment, a letter from US Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) and her enlistment documents.

5.  The applicant’s military records are not available.  The documents herein were provided by the applicant.

6.  Her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) reflects that she entered active duty in the Regular Army on 22 September 1987, achieved the rank of specialist and was honorably separated on 2 November 1990 at expiration of term of service.

7.  At enlistment, she completed a DA Form 2366 (Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 1984 (GI Bill)) which contains the following entry “Soldier Declined GI Bill For Loan Repayment.”

8.  On 22 September 1987, a DA Form 3286-60 (Statement for Enlistment US Army Enlistment Options) was completed.  It does not reflect the LRP as an enlistment option.

9.  A DD Form 1966/1 (Record of Military Processing Armed Forces of the US) reflects her AFQT score as 32.

10.  An Army Reserve Recruit Data Screen printout date November 1990 reflects her AFQT score as 50.

11.  On 1 December 1986, a Maine Guaranteed Student Loan Program form was prepared.  It indicates that the applicant received two loans in the amount of $2500.00 each. 

12.  On 7 April 2000, PERSCOM in response to a congressional inquiry explained that individuals enlisting with the LRP must have an AFQT score of 50 or above.  The applicant did not meet the minimum AFQT score.  However, if the applicant believed that the guidance counselors had not properly counseled her or an error or injustice had occurred, she could apply to this Board for relief.

13.  On 17 April 2001, a demand for payment letter indicates that the applicant owed $10, 554.78 to OSI Education Services, Inc.

14.  On 14 September 2001, a staff member of the Board contacted the applicant.  The applicant at first did not acknowledge who she was and only after being assured that this was an official call did she agree to talk.  She explained her behavior was because of the calls from the student loan collection agency.  She recalled that after leaving active duty she joined the Army National Guard and the USAR.  While with the Guard and the Reserves she served honorably in Southwest Asia and Korea.  In response to a question, she replied that she did not complete a LRP contract.  She followed the advice of the recruiters and after declining to enroll in the GI Bill she believed that was all she needed to do to enlist for the LRP.  Later, she was told she was ineligible because of her AFQT score and while serving in Korea she retook the test and raised her score.  She also advised that she had separated from the ARNG for medical reasons.

15.  Army Regulation 621-202 establishes the policies and provisions for administration of the LRP.  Public Law 99-145, section 2171 authorizes the LRP. The LRP is an enlistment incentive designed to increase Test Score Category    l-IIIA accessions.  The LRP is an educational enlistment incentive that provides for payment of 33 1/3 percent or $1,500.00, whichever is greater, of the unpaid principal of eligible student loans for each year of active duty a soldier completes. An AFQT score of “50” or higher, is a prerequisite.

16.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 2171, limits loans that are eligible for repayment under the LRP to those made, insured, or guaranteed under the Higher Education Act of 1965.

17.  Title 10, U.S. Code section 1552, the law which provides for the Board states that “The Secretary may pay, from applicable current appropriations, a claim for the loss of pay, allowances, compensation, emoluments, or other pecuniary 

benefits, or the repayment of a fine or forfeiture, if, as a result of correcting a record under this section, the amount is found to be due the claimant on account of his or another’s service in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps or Coast Guard, as the case may be.”

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The DD Form 2366 indicates that at enlistment the applicant declined the GI Bill for the LRP.  The Board believes that the applicant most likely was not advised at enlistment that because her AFQT score was less than “50” she was not eligible for the LRP.  However, it was the responsibility of the Army’s enlistment professionals to be aware of the AFQT criteria, redo the contract and enlist the applicant for the GI Bill.  To deny her payment of the loans she had at enlistment is not fair or equitable.

2.  The applicant’s military records may be corrected to show that his                DA Form 3286-66, Statement of Understanding, US Army Incentive Enlistment Program, was amended to include the statement “If a student loan is accepted by the officials processing you for enlistment as payable under the LRP and the government fails to verify her AFQT score, and such failure results in nonpayment of the loan under the LRP, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records may pay the loan, at its sole discretion, in accordance with Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552.”  Invoking this provision allows the Board to pay the amount the lending institution would otherwise have been paid under the LRP.

3.  The Maine Guaranteed Student Loan was verified as eligible for repayment under the Higher Education Act of 1965.

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s military records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by:

a.  amending the DA Form 3286-66, Statement of Understanding, US Army Incentive Enlistment Program, of the individual concerned to include the statement “If a student loan is accepted by the officials processing you for enlistment as payable under the LRP and the government fails to verify her AFQT, and such failure results in nonpayment of the loan by the LRP, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records may pay the loan, at its sole discretion, in accordance with Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552;” and

b.  directing that as a result of the foregoing correction and in accordance with Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1552, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) shall remit payment to the applicant of the total amount of her loans, interest, fines and other charges, to which she is entitled as a result of this correction at the appropriate rate and at the appropriate time.  The applicant will be required to submit the appropriate evidence (promissory notes, etc.) to DFAS to determine the amount due.

BOARD VOTE:  

___rvo __  ____teo _  ___ena _  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__________Raymond V. O'Connor___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001057777	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010927	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	128.05	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.