RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 April 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060014185 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. Gerard W. Schwartz Acting Director Mr. Michael L. Engle Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Mr. James E. Vick Chairperson Mr. Patrick H. McGann, Jr. Member Mr. Gerald J. Purcell Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his enlistment contract be honored as written, and that he receive a full payment of the Army College Fund (ACF) in the amount of $33,000. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that the recruiter lied to him and falsely induced him to enlist by telling him that he would receive both the ACF and the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) totaling $70,000. Due to this fraud being perpetrated on him, he is experiencing great hardship while attending school full time and working full time. 3. The applicant provides DD Form 214 Worksheet (DD Form 214WS); Statement for Enlistment (DA Form 3286-59); Statement of Understanding (DA Form 3286-66); extract of his enlistment contract (DA form 1966/3); Montgomery GI Bill (DD Form 2366); Department of Veterans Affairs Letters, dated 2 and 17 August 2006; Congressional Letters, dated 14, 15, and 21 August 2006; Human Resources Command Letter, dated 17 August 2006; and a balance due letter from Intellitec College, dated 5 September 2006. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. On 7 November 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. His DA Form 3286-59 shows he was enlisting for the United States Army Station/Command/Unit/Area Enlistment Program, Fort Carson, Colorado; the United States Army Incentive Enlistment Program (Cash Bonus $6,000) and the ACF for $33,000. His DD Form 2366 shows that he was enrolled in the MGIB and the ACF for $33,000. 2. The applicant completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 74D1O (Information Systems Operator). 3. On 20 December 2003, the applicant was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement). He attained the rank of specialist, pay grade E4 and had completed 3 years, 1 month and 14 days of creditable active duty. 4. On 17 August 2006, the Director, Army Continuing Education System, Office of the Education Incentives Branch, United States Army Human Resources Command, located at 200 Stovall Street, Alexandria, Virginia, wrote in behalf of the applicant to a member of Congress, that their review of the applicant's DA Form 3286-66 showed his ACF incentive was up to $33,000. Although not clarified on this form, this dollar amount included the basic rate of the MGIB at the time of his enlistment which was $23,400.00. The remaining portion of the $33,000 is his ACF, $9,600 which equates to $266.67 per month for up to 36 months worth of benefits. The ACF is a frozen amount, whereas the basic rate for the MGIB increases annually; and it is currently worth $37,224 which equates to $1,034 per month for full time training. 5. Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program), Table 9-4 of the version in effect at the time, explained the ACF. It stated that applicants for enlistment would be advised of the following: The ACF provided additional educational assistance in addition to that earned under the GI Bill. The money earned would be deposited in the Soldier's Department of Veterans Affairs account. Normally, the funds would be disbursed to the participant in 36 equal monthly installments while the person was enrolled in an approved program of education. 6. USAREC Message 98-080, dated 12 November 1998, increased the total amounts of the ACF (to $33,000 for a 3-year enlistment) effective 12 November 1998. This message stated, in part, "No attempt will be made to describe or provide applicants a breakdown of the MONTGOMERY GI BILL AND ARMY COLLEGE FUND amounts. The amounts reflected above are the total combined amounts of the MGIB and ACF authorized as of 12 Nov 98." DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contentions have been carefully considered. 2. It is acknowledged that nowhere in his contract does it state the ACF amount includes the MGIB. However, in the absence of evidence to the contrary (such as sworn statements or affidavits from his recruiting officials) administrative regularity regarding the regulatory requirement for applicants for enlistment to be properly advised of the ACF is presumed. 3. Army Regulation 601-210, Table 9-4 explains the ACF and states applicants for enlistment will be advised the ACF provides additional educational assistance in addition to that earned under the MGIB. USAREC message 98-080 dated 12 November 1998 clarified that the amount reflected was to be the total combined amount of the MGIB and the ACF. The applicant enlisted in November 2000. There is insufficient evidence to show he was not advised that the $33,000 listed as his ACF benefit was the total combined amount of the MGIB and the ACF. 4. Regrettably, there is insufficient evidence which would warrant granting the relief requested. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___JEV__ __PHM__ __GJP __ 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. ___ James E. Vick________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060014185 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20070424 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY . . . DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 103.0100 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.