Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01341
Original file (BC 2013 01341.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
		RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01341
			COUNSEL:  NONE
			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill educational 
benefits to his dependent.

________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Post-9/11 GI Bill program was not in effect when he retired 
in 2005. 

He was told that he had to be on active duty to transfer his 
benefits.  This is unfair to military members who retired or 
separated before the program started.

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 Oct 05, the applicant retired in the grade of technical 
sergeant effective, after serving 24 years and 23 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 that there has been 
no injustice to the extent that the applicant did not receive 
adequate counseling as required by law and Department of Defense 
(DoD) regulation.  In addition, the applicant retired on 30 Sep 
05, [sic] and the Post-9/11 GI Bill program was not in effect 
until 1 Aug 09.  

Title 38, United States Code (USC), Chapter 33, section 
3319(f)(1) states “an individual may transfer such entitlement 
only while serving as a member of the armed forces when the 
transfer is executed.”

The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 19 Apr 13, 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 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 error or injustice.  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 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.  While it is 
unfortunate that he retired prior to the effective date of the 
program, this in itself, does not serve to make him 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 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 Docket Number    
BC-2013-01341 in Executive Session on 12 Nov 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Mar 13, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 9 Apr 13.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Apr 13.




					
					Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00591

    Original file (BC-2013-00591.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She retired in Apr 08, and had the time needed to transfer her Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits to her son. 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 office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02710

    Original file (BC 2013 02710.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. 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 office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02961

    Original file (BC 2013 02961.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A service member is considered to be retirement eligible if he or she has completed 20 years of active duty or 20 qualifying years of reserve service. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-02961 in Executive Session on 28 May 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence in AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2013-02961 was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03886

    Original file (BC 2013 03886.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03886 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits to his dependents. 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 | CY2013 | BC-2013-00386

    Original file (BC-2013-00386.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Service members enrolled in the Post-9/11 GI Bill Program are able to transfer unused educational benefits to their dependent spouse or children. A complete copy of the DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01022

    Original file (BC 2013 01022.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant retired from active duty almost three years prior to the effective date of the provisions of the Post-9/11 GI Bill program that allow...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01703

    Original file (BC 2013 01703.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He would have transferred his MGIB benefits to the Post-9/11 Bill if he would have known that MGIB transferability to dependents went away and/or that his ADSC would have been waived if he transferred to the Post-9/11 GI Bill. He was not provided the proper information pertaining to the GI Bill benefits or transferring his education benefits to the Post-9/11 GI Bill. While the applicant contends he was unaware that he could not transfer the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) (Chapter 30) to his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01497

    Original file (BC-2013-01497.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    As of this date, this office has not received a response. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01497 in Executive Session on 10 Dec 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Feb 2013, w/atch. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 2013.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05457

    Original file (BC 2013 05457.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He made his request for Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) correctly. Post-9/11 GI Bill: Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty or Selected Reserve, officer or enlisted) on or after 1 Aug 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 4 additional years in the Armed Forces from the date of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-05543

    Original file (BC-2012-05543.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He inquired into transferring the benefit to his daughter and received a letter that stated he was not able to transfer the educational benefit. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial since the program for Transfer of Educational Benefits started on 1 August 2009, which is after his retirement. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant's submission, we agree with the opinion and...