RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03898
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His application for Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) be
approved.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
On 14 June 2008, he reenlisted for 5 years and 2 months extending
his enlistment to August 2013. The TEB program began in August
2009. He submitted his first request on 28 August and was denied
due to no retainability. He reapplied on 3 December 2009 and did
not receive notification that further action was required.
According to PSDM 09-44 he met all requirements to transfer
benefits as his Date Eligible to Return from Overseas (DEROS) was
13 August - which satisfied requirements for a 3-year service
commitment. If a current Statement of Understanding (SOU) needs
to be completed, he will accomplish upon [the Boards] decision
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the grade of master
sergeant.
Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty or Selected Reserve,
officer or enlisted) on or after August 1, 2009, who is eligible
for the Post-9/11 GI Bill, and 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, may transfer unused Post-9/11 benefits to their
dependents.
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:
DPSIT recommends denial. DPSIT states the applicants
application is not supported with evidence that he was a victim
of an error or injustice. Following the notes in Right Now
Technology (RNT_ it seems the applicant never made the attempt to
follow through with signing the Statement of Understanding (SOU).
He was sent an email on 28 August 2009 requesting him to sign and
return the SOU and given step by step instructions on how to
accomplish the signing of the SOU. On 3 December 2009, an email
was sent to the applicant stating that AFPC Service Center
received his application for TEB and stating that the application
will expire in 30 days. The email listed the instructions on how
to sign the SOU; he never submitted the signed SOU. The email
sent to the applicant clearly states the application process and
that he needs to sign the SOU through the vMPF and that this
needs to be accomplished within 30 calendar days. DPSIT finds
there has been no injustice to the extent that the applicant did
not receive adequate counseling as required by law and DoD
regulation.
The DPSIT complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant provided a second DD Form 149 (Application for
Correction of Military Record) requesting his application for TEB
be changed. He states there is conflicting information that was
received from AFPC pertaining to the TEB.
The applicants complete response, with attachments 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. 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.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2012-03898 in Executive Session on 5 June 2013, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-03898 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 August 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 13 September 2012,
w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 September 2012.
Exhibit D. DD Form 149, dated 18 October 2012, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05452
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He submitted his original TEB paperwork with a signed Statement of Understanding (SOU) on 24 Nov 09 but for some reason, it did not go through at that time. 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 C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03439
He was sent an email on 23 February 2010 requesting him to sign and return the SOU. Based on the fact that the applicant signed the ADSC and served the time requirement clearly establishes his intent to transfer benefits to his dependents. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 10 March 2010, he elected to transfer...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03062
He submitted an application for the TEB on 13 March 2011 at which point he thought the application process was complete. 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. Without the signing of an SOU there is no way the TFSC has any idea the applicant wants the obligated four year ADSC that goes along with the transfer of the benefit.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03046
The applicant applied for Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) in July 2010, but on 16 August 2010 AFPC sent a rejection of his application because he did not sign his Statement of Understanding (SOU). The evidence of record indicates that although the applicant applied for TEB in July 2010, he failed to complete the SOU. As such, we find the evidence sufficient to conclude that it is in the interest of justice to recommend correction of his records as indicated below.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-05210
He completed the required application to transfer his Post- 9/11 GI Bill TEB to his dependent. On multiple occasions in the months of January through March, his network administrators worked on his computer multiple times a week sometimes even several times a day. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 22 February 2010, he...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01346
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. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 31 Mar 13, a copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). However, considering that at the time of his original 12 Dec...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04961
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04961 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he transferred his Post-9/11 GI Bill Education Benefits (TEB) to his dependents while on active duty. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force...
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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-05521
In order to transfer the benefits now he would incur a 4 year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC). On 25 Oct 12, an email was sent to the applicant requesting him to sign the SOU; however, he never signed the SOU or attempted to follow-up by contacting the Total Force Serve Center (TFSC) to see if his application was complete. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01917
Upon further inquiry with AFPC personnel, he was informed that his disapproval was due to no signed SOU in his personnel file; however, he states that he completed a SOU and provided this document in his original TEB submission. Without a signed SOU, TFSC personnel cannot determine if the applicant accepts the 4 year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC); therefore, no eligibility for the program could be established, as the law/regulations cite the date of request as the date on which the...