RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04640
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be allowed to have his Post 9/11 GI Bill transfer date
backdated to reflect original application date of 12 October
2010.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He applied to transfer his benefits; however, his application was
denied, for allegedly lacking a MOU for the ADSC.
The applicant provides no documentation in support of his appeal.
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is current serving on active duty in the grade of
lieutenant colonel.
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:
AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial. DPSIT states the applicant did
initially apply to transfer to the Post 9/11 GI Bill program
12 October 2010. The AFPC Service Center did receive his initial
request 13 October 2010 and stated that the application will
expire in 14 calendar days. A response was sent to the member
2 November 2010 stating that his application had expired because
he had not completed the Statement of Understanding
(SOU)/acquired the appropriate retainability. The applicant did
not notify the AFPC Service Center until 18 November 2011 and
must reapply to the Post 9/11 GI Bill program.
The DPSIT complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 13 January 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has received no
response.
_________________________________________________________________
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. The
applicants contentions are duly noted; 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 of an error
or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief
sought.
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 DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of an error or an injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 Docket
Number BC-2011-04640 in Executive Session on 13 September 2012,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2011-04640 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 November 2011.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 4 January 2012.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 January 2012.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00049
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00049 IN THE MATTER OF: COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ______________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) application be approved. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reason his TEB application was disapproved was “Service Member (SM) has not committed to the required...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03774
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He tried to apply for Post 9/11 GI Bill Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) in August 2011, but was told he had to make an election while he was still on active duty. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force which is at Exhibit B. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03895
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03895 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04835
Post-9/11 GI Bill Transferability: Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) who meets Post- 9/11 GI Bill eligibility requirements and at the time of the approval of the members request to transfer entitlement to educational assistance: Has at least six years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) on the date of election and agrees to serve four additional years in the Air Force from the date of request, regardless of the number of...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04008
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After retiring on 1 September 2010, she called to have her GI Bill benefits transferred to her stepson. Title 38 U.S.C 3323(b)(1) and (2) required the Secretary to provide members information on the Post-9/11 GI Bill and required the Military Departments to provide and document individuals pre-separation or release from active duty counseling on the Post-9/11 GI Bill. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00720
The complete AFPC/DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit B. He believes his ADSC should be 9 June 2015 based on his original intent for the TEB and the fact that he did not receive an email concerning the SOU and an expired TEB application. We note the applicant’s assertion that he suffered an injustice when he did not receive an email concerning the SOU and an expired TEB application; however, he has not provided sufficient evidence to support that he was treated any differently than other...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03835
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03835 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational benefits to his dependents without incurring an additional Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC). The applicant provides no evidence of error or injustice on the part of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00338
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00338 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to apply to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents with an effective date of January 2010 to avoid incurring an additional active duty service commitment (ADSC). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05563
Failure to submit the required documentation or obtain retainability in a timely manner would result in a disapproval of an application for transferability. On 7 April 2010, the applicant was sent another email stating that his TEB had expired because he did not get the required retainability. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 21 December 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03772
He became aware, after retiring from the Air Force, that he needed to transfer his educational benefits prior to retirement. The applicanst Certificate of Eligibility from the VA is dated 22 June 2009. ___________________________________________________________________ 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...