IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 May 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140006850 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests approval to transfer educational benefits to his dependents under the Transfer of Education Benefits provision of the Post-9/11 GI Bill with an effective date of October 2010. 2. The applicant states on or about October 2010, he went on the Post-9/11 website and transferred his educational benefits to his daughter and son. He adds he clicked on save and then closed out. However, during his Army Career and Alumni Program class in October 2013, he was informed that he had not transferred his benefits to his dependents. He states he also checked his Army Knowledge Online and milConnect websites and there was no information that indicated he transferred his benefits to his dependents. He offers that as far as he knew the changes were made and everything had been transferred. He concludes that he should not be required to add 4 additional years to his service in order to qualify for the TEB provision of the Post-9/11 GI Bill because of a clerical error. 3. The applicant does not provide any additional evidence. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer in the rank of second lieutenant on 5 May 1995. He is currently serving on active duty in the Regular Army in the rank of lieutenant colonel (LTC)/O5. 2. On 22 June 2009, the Department of Defense (DOD) established the criteria for eligibility and transfer of unused educational benefits to eligible family members. The policy states an eligible member is any member of the Armed Forces on or after 1 August 2009 who, at the time of the approval of the individual's request to transfer entitlement to educational assistance under this section, is eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill and: a. has at least 6 years of service in the Armed Forces on the date of election and agrees to serve 4 additional years in the Armed Forces from the date of election; or b. has at least 10 years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) on the date of election, is precluded by either standard policy (service or DOD) or statute from committing to 4 additional years, and agrees to serve the maximum amount of time allowed by such policy or statute; or c. is or becomes retirement eligible during the period 1 August 2009 through 1 August 2013. A service member is considered to be retirement eligible if he or she has completed 20 years of active duty or 20 qualifying years of Reserve service. 3. The policy further states the Secretaries of the Military Departments will provide active duty participants and members of the Reserve Components with qualifying active duty service, individual pre-separation or release from active duty counseling on the benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill document accordingly, and maintain records for individuals who receive supplemental educational assistance under Public Law 110-252, section 3316. 4. On 10 July 2009, the Army released the Post-9/11 GI Bill Implementation Policy which identified and established responsibilities, eligibility criteria, benefits, and detailed guidance for administration of the program. 5. DOD, the Army, and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) initiated a massive public campaign plan that generated major communications through military, public, and social media venues on the Post-9/11 GI Bill and subsequent transfer of educational benefits. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant maintains he went on the Post-9/11 GI Bill website and transferred his educational benefits to his dependents in October 2010 and, therefore, he should not be required to serve an additional 4 years because of a clerical error. There is no evidence and the applicant did not provide any to show that he attempted to transfer his benefit to his dependents in October 2010. 2. It is noted that the applicant was a senior Army officer with over 15 years of active service. Therefore, he should have been intimately familiar with the Army process and the need to verify any follow-up on any actions completed without the benefit of a response. One cannot blame the system for a "clerical error" when they took no action to follow-up on their request within a reasonable amount of time. 3. Nevertheless, the requirement to serve the 4 additional years is embedded in the law and a change to this law is not within the purview of this Board. Additionally, the ABCMR does not correct records solely for the purpose of establishing entitlement to other programs or benefits. In view of the above, his request should be denied. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___x____ ____x___ ____x ___ 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. ___________x______________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140006850 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140006850 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1