AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01770 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
She be allowed to transfer her Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to her 
dependents. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
She was told before she was medically retired that she would be 
able to transfer her education benefits to her dependent.   
 
She enrolled and paid into her education benefits in 1986.  She 
wanted  to  continue  to  serve  her  country  but  was  medically 
retired. 
 
She  is  unable  to  use  her  education  benefits  due  to  her 
disabilities.   
 
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The  applicant  retired  in  the  grade  of  senior  master  sergeant 
effective 28 May 09 after serving 23 years, 2 months, and 3 days 
of active duty service. 
 
Additional  relevant  facts  pertaining  to  this  application, 
extracted from the applicant’s 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  was 
retired effective 28 May 09.  The Program was not in effect until 
1 Aug 09.  Since 38 United States Code (USC) Chapter 33 Section 
3319  (f)(1)  states  that  “an  individual…may  transfer  such 
entitlement  only  while  serving  as  a  member  of  the  Armed  Forces 
when  the  transfer  is  executed,”  we  can  only  recommend  deny.  
DPSIT  found  no  injustice  to  the  extent  that  the  service  member 

did  not  receive  adequate  counseling  as  required  by  law  and  DoD 
regulation. 
 
DPSIT  states  in  part,  service  members  enrolled  in  38  U.S.C., 
Chapter  33  (Post-9/11  Educational  Assistance),  are  able  to 
transfer  unused educational benefits to their dependent spouses 
or  children.    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 years of 
service in the Armed Forces on the date of election, and agrees 
to serve a specified additional period in the Armed Forces from 
the date of election (if applicable), may transfer unused Post-
9/11  benefits  to  their  dependents  pursuant  to  Service 
regulations.  The transfer must be initiated while the member is 
serving in the Armed Forces, which is defined as limited to those 
on active duty or in the Selected Reserve. 
 
The Air Force issued AFI 36-2306, Voluntary Education Program, on 
23  Jul  09,  which  was  subsequently  replaced  with  AFI  36-2306, 
Attachment  9.    Paragraph  A9.4.3.15.4.,  requires  pre-separation 
counseling, documented on DD Form 2648, Pre-Separation Counseling 
Checklist.  However, the Air Force did not engage in a Service-
wide  effort  to  seek  out  members  who  were  already  on  terminal 
leave,  or  who  had  already  completed  their  pre-separation 
counseling, in order to provide them with additional counseling 
on the Post-9/11 GI Bill. 
 
The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit B. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
The applicant states when she was (Temporary Medically Retired) 
(sic) placed on the Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) 
she  was  told  by  the  base  education  office  that  her  dependents 
would be able to get her education benefits.  She was officially 
retired on 19 Sep 10, which qualifies her for the benefits.   
 
There is nothing in the recommendation that states what type of 
retirement which can cause misrepresentation.  
 
She  should  have  the  same  rights  as  those  who  received  a 
retirement date on or after Aug 09, that were allowed to transfer 
their  education  benefits.    The  Air  Force  medically  retired  her 
due  to  no  fault  of  her  own.    She  served  for  24  years  in  the 
military and would like to be able to give her education benefits 
to her son.   
 
The applicant's complete response 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 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.    The 
applicant's  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.  Although the applicant was initially placed on the 
TDRL on 28 May 09, and not permanently retired until 19 Sep 10, 
time  on  the  TDRL  is  not  considered  active  duty  service.    The 
Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) program was implemented on 
1 Aug 09 and required that you be on active duty at the time of 
transfer.    The  applicant  was  already  in  a  retired  status  and 
therefore  was  not  eligible  for  the  program.    In  view  of  the 
above, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought 
in this application. 
 
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  issue(s) 
involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
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-2012-01770  in  Executive  Session  on  13  Nov  12,  under  the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

, Panel Chair 
, Member 
, Member 

 

3 

The  following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number 
BC-2012-01770 was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Apr 12, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 22 May 12. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Jun 12. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 8 Aug 12, w/atch. 
 
 
 
 
 

 
Panel Chair 

 
 

  
  

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

4