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 applicants 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 applicants
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 applicants 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
applicants 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 applicants 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
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02291
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02291 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents. A1PA reviewed the DMDCs TEB database that confirmed the applicant did not apply to transfer his benefits before his 1 Dec 10 retirement. To date, a response has not been...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01722
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01722 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be entitled to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents. Any member of the Armed Forces, active duty or Selected Reserve, officer or enlisted, on or after 1 Aug 09, who is eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill, has at least 6...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02346
A1PA states the applicant did not submit documentation to support his assertion that he submitted a request to transfer Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his younger son prior to his retirement on 1 Oct 10. 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 that the applicant has not been the victim...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00204
The VONAPP system cannot be used to transfer this benefit; it must be done using the TEB web site. The applicant used the wrong system; however, he does not claim the Air Force incorrectly counseled him on the transfer process. ___________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00755
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00755 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be entitled to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependent son. He was relieved from active duty, on 31 May 2010, with a reason for separation voluntary retirement sufficient service for retirement. Post-9/11 GI Bill: Any member...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01784
The applicant does not provide any evidence that he submitted an application on or about 16 January 2011. The A1PA complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states his spouse decided to further her education and he would like to transfer his benefits to his spouse. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01143
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01143 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-01143 in Executive Session on 10...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00454
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was advised during his retirement out-processing that all he needed to do was complete the required forms to transfer his GI benefits to his dependents before he retired. The transfer date could be effective as early as 1 August 2009 and there would be no need to place the member on active duty since the TEB system allows for correction of the record by Air Force personnel. The complete HQ...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01253
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He applied to transfer from the MGIB to the Post 9/11 GI Bill in February 2010 but was advised by the Nellis education office to wait one year to apply for TEB. A&FRCs use a standardized briefing that informs members there are additional service commitments associated with transferring Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits and they should seek additional counseling if interested in transferring benefits. As...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03994
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibits C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AF/A1PA indicates that both the Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) widely publicized the Post- 9/11 GI Bill and the transferability feature. Notwithstanding the above, the Board could find there was...