MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           24 September 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002071275

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Chairperson	
	Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that his loans be paid under his Loan Repayment Program (LRP) addendum.  In the alternative, he requests that he be allowed to enroll in the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB).

APPLICANT STATES:  That he came to the continental United States from his home in St. Croix, Virgin Islands, to attend college.  In his third year of college he was approached by a recruiter who offered him the LRP and a $20,000.00 enlistment bonus.  With a total of $45,500.00 in student loans, he withdrew from school and enlisted, intending to finish college while in the Army.  However, after he enlisted he was told that three of his student loans weren’t payable under the LRP, two because they were local government loans, the other because the loan wasn’t in his name.  While that disappointed him, it didn’t deter him because the bulk of his student loans were in the final two promissory notes.  However, seven months later, he was informed that these two loans weren’t payable under the LRP.  Eight months after he was informed his last two loans weren’t payable under the LRP, he was offered a discharge.  He intended to accept the discharge until he realized that, with his loans then in default, he would be unable to obtain federal aid or another loan to finish college.  So he opted to remain on active duty.  He then called the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) to inquire about how to enroll in the MGIB.  The PERSCOM recommended he petition this Board for relief on his student loans.

In support of his request the applicant submits his student loans, which consist of a Virgin Islands Board of Education loan for $1,000.00 for the 2000 – 2001 school year; a Virgin Islands Board of Education loan for $2,000.00 for the 1998 – 1999 school year; a Citibank student loan in his mother’s name for $4,430.00; a Wells Fargo educational loan for $7,500.00; and three Sallie Mae student loans in the amount of $12,600, $9,000.00, and $9,000.00.  He also submits a letter from the PERSCOM informing him his Sallie Mae student loans are considered private loans and are not eligible for payment under the LRP.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

That he enlisted in the Army Reserve Delayed Entry Program for 4 years on 30 October 2000.  At that time he executed a $20,000.00 bonus addendum and a $65,000.00 (maximum) LRP addendum.  On one form in his enlistment packet it was stated that “ . . . I must hand carry all of my student loan promissory notes, and these loans must be acceptable loans under the Army Regulations.”

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 November 2000.  He disenrolled from the MGIB at his first duty station.

The MGIB, as outlined in Title 38, United States Code, chapter 30, section 1411b, provides for soldiers, who entered the service after 30 June 1985, to contribute $1,200.00 to the program during their first 12 months service.  After completion of their service obligation, which must be considered honorable, he or she is entitled to educational benefits for 36 months.  Participation in the program is automatic, unless the soldier voluntarily withdraws from the program at the time of processing into the Army at a reception station.  Soldiers who enlist for the LRP must disenroll from the MGIB. 

The LRP provides for the repayment by the Government of a designated portion of any outstanding student loan(s) secured after 1 October 1975.  By law (Title 10, U.S. Code, section 2171), the Government can only pay those student loans made or insured under the Higher Education Act of 1965.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 7 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members who were promised a benefit in conjunction with their enlistment or reenlistment which the Army cannot honor.  These individuals have the option of either requesting immediate discharge or waiving the benefit and remaining in the Army.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  It is apparent from the statement the applicant signed on his LRP addendum that he did not bring his promissory notes to the recruiting station when he enlisted.  Without those promissory notes, the applicant's recruiter could not determine whether they were payable or not.

2.  The applicant was promised by the Army that it would pay those student loans made or insured under the Higher Education Act of 1965.  The Army was, and is, ready and willing to honor that promise.  Even though the applicant's enlistment would not be considered defective by a strict interpretation of Army Regulation 635-200, the applicant's command used the fact that his loans were not payable under the LRP to offer him a discharge.

3.  The Army is a large organization and mistakes are made in the processing of enlistments.  Since enlistment incentives are mandated by law, the Army is limited to offering soldiers who are promised an incentive that cannot be honored by the Army a severance from the defective contract in the form of a discharge.  The applicant was offered, and declined, a discharge from the defective enlistment contract.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___kwl___  ____dph  ___aao__  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002071275	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020924	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.