RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02149 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The application he completed for the Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) be approved. __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was misinformed about the fact that he had to sign a Statement of Understanding (SOU). He was advised that an email was sent to him to sign the SOU; however, he was in a joint assignment. Therefore, he never received any e-mails pertaining to the SOU. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. __________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Post-9/11 GI Bill Transferability: Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty or Selected Reserve, officer or enlisted) on or after 1 Aug 2009, who is eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill. __________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial. DPSIT states that on 10 Feb 2010, the applicant submitted an application for the Post-9/11 GI Bill through the “DMDC” website. On 10 Feb 2010, he was sent an email requesting he sign his SOU. On 24 Feb 2010, he was sent another email stating his application had expired because he did not sign the SOU. Had the applicant contacted the Total Force Service Center (TFSC), he would have received guidance to return to the virtual Military Personnel Flight to sign the SOU. Without signing the SOU there is no way the TFSC knew he wanted to obligate the 4-years required for TEB. DPSIT finds there has been no injustice to the extent that the applicant did not receive adequate counseling as required by law and DoD regulations. The complete DPSIT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 19 Sep 2013, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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 error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. __________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. __________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR BC-2013- 02149 in Executive Session on 12 Mar 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member ? All members voted to correct the record as recommended. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR BC-2013- 02419 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Apr 2013. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 20 Aug 2013, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Sep 2013. Panel Chair 2 2