RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-02587
		
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill educational 
benefits to his spouse and son effective 8 April 2011.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

1.  He received flawed advice from multiple education counselors 
regarding the transfer of his Post-9/11 GI Bill education 
benefits to his dependent family members.  

2.  He received his certificate of eligibility (COE) for the 
Post-9/11 GI Bill, in April 2011, from the Department Veterans 
Affairs (DVA).  His intention for seeking the COE was to 
transfer these benefits to his dependents.  There was no mention 
on how to transfer these benefits in the letter he received from 
the DVA.  Shortly after he received the COE, he contacted the 
DVA helpline to inquire how to transfer his educational benefits 
to his 2-year old son and his spouse.  He was notified that he 
should transfer his education benefits immediately before they 
enrolled for classes.  There was no mention that he would incur 
an active duty service commitment if he transferred his Post-
9/11 GI Bill educational benefits to his family members.  

3.  Unsure that the advice he received from the DVA was correct 
he contacted the education center at the nearest base to his 
residence via telephone in June 2011 to inquire on how to 
transfer his education benefits.  He asked the counselor on the 
line if he needed to go to their office to file any paperwork or 
file anything on-line.  He was told that no action was required 
and that he should make the transfer to his dependents 
immediately before they sought education in order to be funded 
by the Post-9/11 GI Bill.  There was no mention that he would 
incur an active duty service commitment if he transferred his 
Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits to his family members.

4.  In early December 2011, he again contacted the DVA help line 
regarding transfer of his education benefits to his dependents.  
This phone call was prompted by discussion of the transfer of 
education benefits with his colleagues.  He again was told that 
he should transfer the education benefits to his family members 
just prior to them seeking further education.  No mention of an 
ADSC was made.

5.  He was on the Air Force Virtual MPF website on 29 May 2012, 
looking for documents in preparation for an upcoming permanent 
change of station (PCS) when he discovered the tab regarding the 
transfer of the GI Bill educational benefits.  He clicked on the 
tab and discovered, for the first time, that if he transferred 
his education benefits he would incur a four-year ADSC.  This 
ADSC obligation was not mentioned in the COE from the DVA nor in 
any of the three previous discussions with education counselors 
as noted above. 

6.  He contacted the Air Force Personnel Center on 29 May 2012, 
and was transferred to an Air Force Post-9/11 GI Bill point of 
contact (POC) who informed him that despite the incorrect 
information he received from three education counselors on three 
separate occasions he would incur a four-year ADSC upon the 
transfer of his education benefits to his family members. 

7.  The POC recommended that he formally make the transfer of 
his education benefits effective the date of their conversation.  
If he did he would effectively incur a four-year ADSC which 
would push his retirement date to the end of May 2016.  The POC 
also recommended an appeal to the Air Force Board for Correction 
of Military Records (AFBCMR) after the transfer took place to 
have the ADSC reduced to three years.  He suggested to the POC 
that this advice was not in his best interest as he had definite 
plans to retire in June 2015.  When he asked what recourse he 
had, given that he had received erroneous advice on multiple 
occasions, the POC again recommended that he make an application 
to the AFBCMR.

8.  Since his initial inquiry on the transfer of education 
benefits to his family members in April 2011, his son has been 
diagnosed with a condition that requires special educational 
needs.  His new duty location fortunately has services in the 
surrounding community that minimally fit his requirements.  
However, these services are not as optimal as those that would 
be available in other locations where there are no military 
installations nearby.  His family's plan is to move to a 
location that has the best therapeutic options available for his 
son as soon as he retires from active duty at the end of June 
2015.  The earlier he is able to have the benefit of better 
services, the better his son’s prognosis will be for the future.  
Staying an extra year on active duty service (as would be 
required if he transferred his education benefits to his family 
members) would impede his son's development.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in 
the grade of Colonel, (O-6).  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, 
extracted from the applicant’s military personnel records are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial.  DPSIT states the Department of 
Veterans Affairs (DVA), DoD, and the military services widely 
publicized the Post-9/11 GI Bill and the transferability 
feature.  DOD developed a special website, hosted by the Defense 
Manpower Data Center (DMDC), to facilitate the transfer of 
educational benefits.  The website system was operational on 
27 June 2009 for the purpose of accepting transfer of education 
benefits applications.  The DoD Directive Type Memo (DTM) and 
AFI 36-2306, Voluntary Education Program, state the transfer 
must be made while the member is serving in the Armed Forces.  
Both documents were published on government-hosted websites 
prior to 1 August 2009, the effective date of the Post-9/11 GI 
Bill.  

The applicant did not provide adequate justification or 
documentation.  The applicant states that every time he dealt 
with the DVA he did what they told him.  Had the applicant gone 
onto the Air Force website to transfer benefits he would have 
been approved and would have found out about the ADSC he would 
have incurred as a result of the transfer of education benefits.  
In addition, if he would have contacted the Air Force Total 
Force Service Center at Randolph AFB he would have found out 
that he indeed did not apply for the Transfer of Benefits (TEB) 
with the Air Force.  It is clear throughout this process that 
the applicant simply failed to apply at the Department of 
Defense's  website (DMDC) to sign up for the TEB benefits.  

The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In his response, the applicant reiterates his contentions and 
clarifies that the VA advisor notified him that no action was 
required on his behalf at the time of his inquiry and he should 
only make the transfer of the GI Bill eligibility to his family 
members shortly before they enrolled for any courses.  He was 
not advised that he should (or could) make the transfer months 
or years prior to his dependents enrolling in any eligible 
course and there was no mention of any active duty service 
commitment (ADSC) that would be incurred for such a transfer of 
education benefits.  

The applicant further states he had five interactions with 
individuals whose job it was to guide him through the transfer 
of his GI Bill education benefits to his family members.  In 
each case, he was not advised that an ADSC would be incurred and 
he was not advised of the DoD's transfer of GI Bill benefits 
website.  Web searches led him to the DVA's website in April 
20ll and when he could find no information regarding GI Bill 
eligibility transfer on the DVA's  website, he called their help 
line and received flawed advice.  If the advertising of the  GI 
Bill was as robust as suggested by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility, then he or at least one of  the five 
counselors mentioned above would have known the process of how 
to transfer GI Bill benefits to his dependents.

The applicant complete response, with attachments of previously 
submitted documents, 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 error or injustice.  After a 
thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant's 
submission, to include his rebuttal, we are not persuaded that 
relief is warranted.  The applicant has not provided evidence 
that he was denied the opportunity to transfer benefits to his 
dependents or that he was miscounseled.  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 applicant has not been the victim 
of an error or injustice.  In view of the above and 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 in Executive 
Session on 27 March 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
			, Member
			, Member


The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR 
Docket Number BC-2012-02587:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 June 2012, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 2 July 2012.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 August 2012
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 11 September 2012, 
w/atchs




                                   
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR
1500 West Perimeter Road, Suite 3700
Joint Base Andrews NAF Washington, MD 20762




Dear:

	Reference your application submitted under the provisions of AFI 36-2603 (Section 1552, 
10 USC), AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-02587. 

	After careful consideration of your application and military records, the Board determined 
that the evidence you presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice.  
Accordingly, the Board denied your application.

	You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for consideration by the 
Board.  In the absence of such additional evidence, a further review of your application is not 
possible.

	BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR




				                                   
				                                   Chief Examiner
				                                   Air Force Board for Correction
				                                   of Military Records

Attachment:
Record of Board Proceedings




5



 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, DC


Office of the Assistant Secretary