AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00789 
COUNSEL: NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His active duty service commitment (ADSC) of 6 Jan 14 be removed 
due to his divorce from his former spouse.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
His  Post-9/11  GI  Bill  benefits  were  never  used  by  his  former 
spouse.  He has revoked all months and the Defense Manpower Data 
Center (DMDC) website shows it was revoked 18 Apr 11.   
 
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his 
divorce decree.  
 
The  applicant's  complete  submission,  with  attachment,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The  applicant  is  currently  serving  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  in 
the grade of major.  
 
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 Exhibit B.  
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
HQ AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial.  DPSIT states that based on the 
information reported in the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) 
and counseling notes in the Right Now Technology (RNT) by Total 
Force  Service  Center  (TFSC)  personnel,  the  applicant  was 
provided  with  instructions/requirements  that  he  needed  to 
accomplish  prior  to  his  TEB  application  being  approved.  
Specifically,  he  needed  to  sign  a  Statement  of  Understanding 
(SOU) agreeing to the obligated service required to participate 
in  the  TEB  option  under  the  Post-9/11  GI  Bill.    When  a  member 
applies for TEB on the DMDC website the first thing that appears 
is  the  Submit  Transfer  Request,  under  the  members  personal 

information  is  a  message  which  states  “Please  note  the 
following: 1) Do not transfer benefits unless you are willing to 
complete  the  service  obligation.    While  you  may  revoke  your 
transfer at any time, a revocation DOES NOT automatically cancel 
the  associated  ADSC,  even  if  benefits  have  not  been  used.  2) 
AFPC WILL NOT pro-rate ADSCs for members who have used any part 
of their VA educational benefits.” 
 
The  applicant  signed  the  SOU  and  his  TEBs  were  approved  on 
9 Feb 10.    The  SOU  clearly  states  the  member  would  incur  a 
service  obligation  period  of  four  years  and  the  ADSC  will  be 
updated  in  the  member’s  record  effective  from  the  date  of 
application in the DMDC TEB website. 
 
The complete DPSIT evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
The  applicant  states  the  AFPC/DPSIT  advisory  opinion  does  not 
address  his  unique  issue  nor  does  it  explain  the  facts  of  his 
case.    The  advisory  opinion  merely  states  the  fact  that  he 
signed a SOU agreeing to a four year ADSC.  When he signed the 
SOU  he  was  married  and  intended  to  give  it  to  his  spouse  and 
serve  the  ADSC.    What  is  not  stated  is  that  after  a  lengthy 
deployment,  he  came  home  in  Apr  11  and  he  and  his  spouse 
divorced shortly thereafter.  He revoked the TEB and his former 
spouse never used any of his Post-9/11 GI Bill.  The government 
incurred ZERO DOLLARS of educational debt on his behalf. 
 
The  applicant  states  that  according  to  the  SOU  under 
Title 38 U.S.C.  chapter  33  “failure  to  complete  the  service 
obligation will result in overpayment which will be recouped by 
the Department of Veterans Affair’s.”  According to AFI 36-2107, 
Active Duty Service Commitments “members incurring an ADSC on or 
after  1  Apr  06  who  fail  to  complete  their  ADSC  are  subject  to 
recoupment unless waived by the Secretary, of a prorated portion 
of  the  cost  of  educational  assistance,  financial  bonus,  or 
benefit.”    Once  again,  this  amount  is  ZERO.    The  statue  only 
references the ADSC obligation where the GI Bill has been used.  
This is not his case.    
 The  applicant  states  he  is  divorced  and  has  no  dependents.  
Therefore, there is no transfer or ability to transfer his Post-
9/11  GI  Bill  benefits.    In  short,  he  has  incurred  a  four  year 
ADSC  but  received  nothing  in  return.    He  promised  to  pay  four 
years to the Air Force in exchange for his spouse to use his GI 
Bill.  However, the benefits were never used.  As such, he took 
a  promise  of  a  four  year  ADSC  off  the  table  when  he  cancelled 
the TEB making it impossible for them to be used. 
 
 
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit D.  

2 
 

 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
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 error or injustice.  We took notice 
of  the  applicant’s  complete  submission  to  include  his  rebuttal 
statement  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 of an 
error  or  injustice.    The  applicant’s  interpretation  of  the 
statement of understanding (SOU) is noted; however, in our view, 
the SOU put the applicant on notice that he would possibly have 
to serve the ADSC even if he had not used any of the benefits.  
While the circumstances of the applicant’s case are regrettable, 
he  has  not  provided  evidence  that  supports  he  is  being  treated 
any  differently  than  others  similarly  situated.    Therefore,  in 
the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no  basis  to 
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.  
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
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  AFBCMR  BC-2012-
00789 in Executive Session on 13 Sep 12, under the provisions of 
AFI 36-2603: 
 

 
 
 

Panel Chair 
Member 
Member 

 
 
 
 
 
 

3 
 

The  following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-00789 was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Feb 12, w/atch. 
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, 29 Mar 12, w/atch. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Apr 12.  
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 15 May 12. 
 
 
 
 
                                  Panel Chair 

4