RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-04860
		COUNSEL:  NONE
                      		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill education 
benefits to his son retroactive to the start of the program 
(August 2009) with time served and no Active Duty Service 
Commitment (ADSC).  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The advice he received at both inception of the program and 
during several transition assistance program sessions was that 
since he was near retirement eligibility (August 2011), he would 
not have to apply until retirement because he would not incur an 
ADSC.  However, in a subsequent phone conversation, he was 
informed that he received erroneous advice and there was much 
confusion and erroneous information with the program.  Because 
he continuously received incorrect/confusing information from 
counselors, he did not apply in a timeframe which would have 
allowed a seamless transfer of Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his 
dependents.  Had he known the correct information, he could have 
applied at the inception of the program and his service 
obligation would have been met with his subsequent service.  

The applicant does not provide any additional evidence in 
support of his appeal.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant retired effective 1 October 2013. 

The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicant’s 
military service records, are contained in the evaluation by the 
Air Force office of primary responsibility at Exhibit C. 

________________________________________________________________


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial and states the applicant initially 
contacted the Total Force Service Center (TFSC) on 22 March 
2011.  He inquired about how much retainability he needed if he 
applied on that day.  The response to him was three years based 
on his Total Active Federal Military Service Date of 20 August 
1991.  The applicant submitted his application on 21 March 2011 
and on 6 April 2011, received an email that his application for 
TEB had expired.  On 17 May 2011, the applicant attended a pre-
separation briefing and indicated on his checklist that he 
desired counseling on the MGIB/Post-9/11 GI Bill.  

On 6 September 2012, the applicant contacted the TFSC and asked:  
“If I were to do my TEB now, how much of an ADSC would I incur?”  
TSFC notes indicate: “Spoke with member concerning the fact that 
he is over 20 years and he states that he would like to speak 
with a TEB expert to address his concerns, he will try back 
either this afternoon or in the morning, as there were no agents 
available.”  The applicant later called and stated that he was 
told he needed four years retainability and requested to speak 
with someone about a way to apply without a three-year 
commitment.  He was contacted by the point-of-contact who told 
him that he was eligible to sign-up and that his Obligation End 
Date for ADSC would be 31 March 2015.  However, the applicant 
never signed up.  

DPSIT states the applicant’s appeal is not supported with 
evidence that he was a victim of an error or injustice.  He had 
numerous opportunities to sign-up for the TEB program and failed 
to do so.  He states it was his intent to transfer his benefits 
in August 2009 when the program started, but there is no 
documentation to support that claim.  The notes in the Right Now 
Technology (RNT) clearly indicates the applicant’s initial 
contact concerning TEB was in March 2011 and at that time he 
submitted an application, but never followed through with 
signing the Statement of Understanding (SOU).  Without the SOU, 
the TFSC has no idea if the applicant agrees to the three year 
ADSC required with the TEB.  

The complete DPSIT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit 
C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He has given his time, safety, and health for as long as he 
could.  As the Air Force is the arbitrator of the technical 
details of awarding the TEB in his situation, he is asking that 
his military record be corrected to reflect his time served as 
of the inception of the program be used in order to satisfy the 
time requirement that existed at the start of the program and 
thus qualify him to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill education 
benefits to his son.  

The applicant’s complete rebuttal is at Exhibit E.  

________________________________________________________________

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 in judging the merits of 
the case; however, we find insufficient evidence of an error or 
injustice to warrant corrective action.  The facts and opinions 
stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the 
evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by the 
applicant; most notably, that he did not complete and return the 
required Statement of Understanding.  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 Docket 
Number BC-2013-04860 in Executive Session on 27 June 2014, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                    , Panel Chair 
                    , Member
                    , Member



The following documentary evidence was considered in connection 
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-04860:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Sep 13.
Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 12 Dec 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 May 14.
Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, not dated.




                     
Panel Chair
4
3