RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00420
                 INDEX CODE:       128.11
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX     COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX      HEARING DESIRED:  No


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  8 AUG 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her  records  be  corrected  to  show  conversion  from  the  Veterans
Education Assistance Program (VEAP) to the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was not informed of the opportunity to convert from  the  Veterans
Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) to the MGIB.  She never received
counseling on the conversion process, there is no DD Form 2366 on file
indicating that she made a choice regarding  the  conversion  and  her
name was not on  the  list  of  VEAP  contributors  eligible  for  the
conversion.

In  support  of  his  request,  applicant  provided  AF   Form   1548,
Authorization to Start, Stop or Change an Allotment and a  copy  of  a
personal check made out to VEAP.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Air Force
on 18 August 1982, and was progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel.

On 1 March 2005, AFPC/DPPAT requested applicant provided evidence that
supports an error or injustice in notification of her eligibility  for
the conversion from the VEAP to the MGIB.  They also informed her that
not  acknowledging  the  official  VEAP/MGIB  conversion   opportunity
announced on her LES statements and local advertised media  is  not  a
government error or injustice.

VEAP was enacted by Congress (38 USC, Chapter 32) to provide veterans’
education benefits for individuals  entering  active  duty  between  1
January 1977 and 30 June 1985.  The MGIB was enacted  (38USC,  Chapter
30) and became effective 1 July 1985.  VEAP was  a  voluntary  program
that offered a maximum $8,100 benefit to the participants.  To  enroll
and  participate,  officer  and  airmen  were  required  to  start  an
allotment or make a deposit.

The applicant’s records show she contributed  the  minimum  $25.00  to
establish VEAP benefits.

Congress opened two windows of opportunity for  VEAP  participants  to
convert their benefits to the more lucrative MGIB.  PL 99-576  allowed
VEAP participants to convert to the MGIB.  The law required applicants
make an election to convert benefits from  9 October  1996  through  8
October 1997.  Congress subsequently opened another conversion  period
in 2001.  Members were required to make an election between 1 November
2000 to 31 October 2001.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAT recommends denial. DPPAT states the  Air  Force  advertised
the opportunity to convert from VEAP to the MGIB at all bases starting
shortly after 9 October 1996.  Publicity was included in the AF  Times
as  well  as  flyers,  emails,  etc.   The  Air  Force  satisfied  the
requirements of PL 99-576 and PL 106-419 by  distributing  information
at commander’s calls, leave and earning statement (LES) announcements,
base newspaper articles, and official bulletins.  The member  received
six LESs with dates ranging from 31 January 2001 to 30 September 2001,
with statements specifically relating to the MGIB conversion.

While the applicant claims  that  her  mail  was  being  forwarded  to
another address, it  does  not  seem  plausible  since  the  LESs  are
delivered to the duty section.  It is also  not  plausible  that  this
misdirection  would  occur  for  over  a  year.   In  addition,  bases
conducted a media blitz using all possible means to notify individuals
of the opportunity to convert.  The Travis  AFB  newspaper,  Tailwind,
provided a detailed article on the conversion and provided  dates  and
places of briefings.  Applicant also appeared on the list of  eligible
sent to all education centers.

DPPAT states approval of the applicant’s request will violate 38  USC,
Chapter 30, Section 3018C.  Time frames for conversion  during  either
period were determined by public laws.  There was no  error  regarding
the  conversion  window  opportunity  since  the  program  was  widely
publicized throughout DoD.

The DPPAT evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states the aforementioned LESs sent as notification  for
conversion eligibility was sent to a PSC Box that was not her address.
 She made several attempts to change this address but the change  took
almost a year.  This may be one of the reasons  she  did  not  receive
notification of her eligibility for conversion of VEAP to the MGIB.

Her complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies  provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.  The application was not  timely  filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or injustice.  After a  thorough  review  of
the  evidence  of  record  and  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded the applicant  should  be  enrolled  in  the  MGIB  program.
Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find  these
assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to  override
the rationale provided by the office of  primary  responsibility.   We
therefore agree with their  recommendation  and  adopt  the  rationale
expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has  failed
to sustain her burden  of  having  suffered  either  an  error  or  an
injustice.  In view of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the
contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket  Number  BC-2005-
00420 in Executive Session on 24 May 2005, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:

                  Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Vice Chair
                  Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
                  Mr. Michael V. Barbolino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Jan 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.    Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAT, dated 25 Mar 05, w/atch.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Apr 05.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, 7 Mar 05, w/atchs.




                                   MARILYN THOMAS
                                   Vice Chair