RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01337 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was unaware that he had to transfer his benefits to his daughter prior to his official retirement date. He served honorably for 26 years with his family enduring and sacrificing right beside him. He believes his daughter should not have to suffer for his mistake in not transferring the benefits in time. In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Releaser or Discharge from Active Duty and Special Order AC-006488. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was relieved from active duty on 28 February 2010 and retired from the Air Force on 1 March 2010, having served over 26 years, and 21 days on active duty. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: USAF/A1PA recommends denial. A1PA states the applicant’s Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) record shows he transferred four months of benefits to his son but no months to his daughter or spouse before he retired. It should be noted that when the applicant transferred benefits on 11 January 2010, the DMDC TEB system did not warn/advise applicants they must transfer at least one month of benefits to all eligible dependents that the service member wanted to share benefits with after retirement. The “warning” was added in April 2010. The applicant was not denied the opportunity to transfer benefits while on active duty, and he provided no evidence to support governmental injustice or error. Although the applicant did not have the benefit of the notice/warning later added to the TEB site, he did not provide any documentation to support the contention he planned to add his daughter at a later date. In addition, in his application he admits the failure to transfer benefits to his daughter was an oversight on his part and he admits making a mistake. He does not allege DoD or the AF improperly counseled him. The A1PA complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states the error on the part of the DoD/AF is not ensuring all members were briefed/counseled on the requirements/limitations of the Post 9/11 GI Bill and the DMDC TEB warning system was not added until April 2010 – he transferred benefits in January 2010. Had he been counseled or warned, he would have made sure benefits were transferred before retiring from active duty. The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ _ 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 an error or injustice. We note the applicant’s assertion that he was unaware that he had to transfer his educational benefits to his daughter prior to his official retirement date. However, records show he transferred educational benefits to his son before he retired and he admits the failure to transfer benefits to his daughter was an oversight on his part. Based on its view of the circumstances of this case the Board majority does not find the applicant has been the victim of error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board majority finds no basis to recommend granting the relief sought. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-01337 in Executive Session on 18 January 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of the application. XXX voted to grant the applicant’s request but does not desire to submit a minority report. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011- 01337 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 April 2011. Exhibit B. Letter, USAF/A1PA, dated 4 May 2011. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 May 2011. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, not dated. Panel Chair