RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01371 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he transferred his Post-9/11 GI Bill Education Benefits (TEB) to his dependent daughter while he was on active duty. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was misled to believe he was approved for TEB while preparing to retire from active duty. He only discovered the error three years after retirement when the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) notified his daughter of her lack of TEB eligibility. Between the time he applied for retirement and his retirement date, he applied for and was approved for TEB. He contends he should have been told approval of TEB was contingent upon the fulfillment of an Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC). He would have gladly served the additional ADSC had he known, or been notified of, this requirement. While there were problems with the Virtual Military Personnel Flight (vMPF) web site, he followed all the proper procedures to apply for TEB, and should not be held responsible for someone else’s mistake that costs his daughter her TEB eligibility. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 3 Nov 89, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force. As the applicant was eligible for retirement during the period 1 Aug 09 through 31 Jul 10, he could have elected to transfer his benefits during this period and would have incurred a one year active duty service commitment. On 1 Apr 11, the applicant applied for retirement, with an effective date of 1 Dec 11. On 31 Aug 11, according to information provided by the applicant, the TEB application was approved by the Total Force Service Center (TFSC), with an effective date of 19 Aug 11. On 30 Nov 11, the applicant was relieved from active duty and retired, effective 1 Dec 11, and was credited with 22 years and 28 days of active service. On 21 Mar 14, according to information provided by the applicant, his dependent daughter received notification of disapproval of TEB because from the DVA because her “parent has not been approved by DoD to transfer entitlement.” On 26 Mar 14, according to information provided by the applicant, he received notice of TEB approval from the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which is included at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant did not serve a complete ADSC after TEB application, in accordance with AFI 36-2306, Voluntary Education Program, rendering him ineligible for the TEB program. His 19 Aug 11 request for TEB should have been denied without some obligation to serve until at least 18 Aug 12. Knowing he applied for TEB after his approved retirement date, the applicant did not inquire to ensure TEB eligibility. As enrollment for TEB and the applicant’s retirement request were voluntary actions, the applicant should have ensured all requirements were met if he had any reservations about ensuring TEB to his dependents prior to retirement. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant refutes the validity of the conclusions of the advisory opinions and argues that with documented approval of TEB enrollment from the TFSC, he would have no need to follow up with anyone to ensure his request for TEB was approved. In support of his response, the applicant provides copies of his vMPF incident #110822-000698, stating “if you do require retainability, vMPF will display the retainability requirements.” Due to the errors with vMPF, he signed a blank Statement of Understanding (SOU) and was never contacted about retainablity after his application date of 19 Aug 11. He reiterates his strong desire to transfer the entitlement to his daughter would have compelled him to serve any additional time to meet the obligation for TEB, had he been properly informed. THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3 A majority of the panel finds sufficient evidence of an injustice. The Board took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case, to include the applicant’s response to the Air Force evaluation. While the majority notes the recommendation from AFPC/DPSIT indicating he should have inquired about a possible service commitment associated with his TEB eligibility, because he applied for TEB after he was approved to retire, the majority believes corrective action is warranted. In this respect, the majority notes that it is reasonable to conclude that because he received electronic confirmation of TEB approval, without notice of additional obligation, that it is more likely than not he believed he had properly completed the required obligation of the Post-9/11 GI Bill TEB program. Additionally, given the fact he served beyond the minimum 20 years of service, the majority fids it reasonable to believe he would have voluntarily served an additional obligation, had he been properly notified of this requirement. Therefore, in view of the fact that the applicant could have elected to transfer his benefits as early as 1 Aug 09 and successfully served the requisite ADSC, the majority of the Board recommends the applicant’s record be corrected as indicated below. 4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 1 August 2009 he elected to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational Benefits to his eligible dependents, generating an active duty service commitment of one year, with a 31 July 2010 expiration date. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-01371 in Executive Session on 20 Feb 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Panel Member , Panel Member By a majority vote, the Board voted to grant the applicant’s request. voted to deny, but did not elect to provide a minority report. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Mar 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 9 Apr 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Aug 14. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 26 Aug 14, w/atchs.