RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 MARCH 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060003430 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. 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, in effect, correction of her military records to allow her to receive educational benefits associated with the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) and the Army College Fund (ACF). 2. The applicant argues that her contract states that she is to receive $33,000.00 for the ACF, which would be $916.66 per month for 36 months. She maintains that when she first enrolled in college, January 2004, the ACF payment was only $44.44, which was a total of $1,600.00 for 36 months. In February 2004, the applicant states she contacted a recruiter to assist her in correcting this problem. She also admits that Veteran Affairs attempted to correct this problem and increased her ACF payments to $266.66 per month. 3. The applicant provides her DD Form 2366-1 (Montgomery GI Bill Act of 1984), DA Form 3286-59 (Statement of Understanding United States Army Incentive Enlistment Program) and her enlistment documents. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's records show she enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years on 15 November 2000. As part of her enlistment contract, she was eligible to participate in the US Army Incentive Enlistment Program which consisted of $33,000.00 for the Army College Fund. 2. The applicant's DD Form 2386-66 (Statement of Understanding) shows that she enlisted for the MGIB and the ACF education incentive programs. 3. In the processing of this case, the Board obtained an advisory opinion from the Human Resources Command, Chief, Education Incentives Branch. It was opined that the applicant's enlistment contract reflects $33,000.00 which includes the combined MGIB and ACF benefits. The applicant's enlistment contract does not clarify this information and is blatantly misleading. When the applicant entered active duty on 15 November 2000, for a 3-year enlistment, the veteran's rate for basic MGIB benefits was $23,400.00 for a 3-year term of service obligation. The ACF portion of her combined benefits was $9,600.00 which equates to $266.67.00 per month for up to 36 months worth of benefits. Therefore, approval of the applicant's request and total payment in the amount of $23,400.00 for the MGIB was recommended. The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant and she concurred on 9 September 2006. 4. 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. 5. U. S. Army Recruiting Command (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 ___XX___ __XX__ __XX____ 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. ______XXXXXXXXX_________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060003430 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED 20070301 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. 103.00 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.