RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 
IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05062
	 					COUNSEL:  NONE
      					        HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show that on 20 Aug 09 he 
transferred his Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits to his 
dependents.   

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not properly informed of his eligibility and opportunity 
for Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB).

In Jun 09, he had 15 years of service and if informed at the 
time there is no reasonable rationale that he would not have 
initiated transfer since he could retain benefits for himself 
and adjust declared percentages at a later date.

In Aug 09, he was stationed in Korea and was participating in an 
annual theater exercise and was not briefed on TEB.  He departed 
Korea in Oct 09 and it may be that his unit was briefed after he 
departed.

As a United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) graduate, he was 
not eligible for the Montgomery GI Bill.  He would have 
requested TEB for Post-9/11 GI Bill had he understood that the 
eligibility requirements were different.

In support of his request, the applicant provides information 
from the 7th Air Force website on Exercise Ulchi Freedom Guardian 
(UFG).  
 
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was commissioned in to active duty on 1 Jun      
94.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of lieutenant 
colonel (0-5) and is currently serving on active duty.

His DD Form 149 states he is pending retirement in 2014; 
however, according to Special Order Number AC-013965 dated     
24 Jun 14, his retirement order effective 1 Jul 14 was rescinded 
and he was placed on medical hold.  The applicant became 
eligible for retirement effective 1 Jul 14.  

Transferability of Unused Education Benefits to Family Members. 
Subject to the provisions of DoDI 1341.13, Post-9/11 GI Bill, 
the Secretary concerned, to promote recruitment and retention in 
the Uniformed Services, may permit an individual eligible for 
Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance to elect to transfer to 
one or more of his or her family members all or a portion of his 
or her entitlement to such assistance. 

*	Eligible Individuals. Any Service member on or after 
1 August 2009, who is entitled to the Post-9/11 GI Bill at 
the time of the approval of his or her request to transfer 
that entitlement under this section, may transfer that 
entitlement provided he or she meets one of these 
conditions:
o	Has at least 6 years of service in the Military 
Services (active duty or Selected Reserve), National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Commissioned 
Officer Corps (NOAA) Corps, or Commissioned Corps of 
the Public Health Service (PHS) on the date of 
approval and agrees to serve 4 additional years in the 
Military Services, NOAA Corps, or PHS from the date of 
election.
o	Has at least 10 years of service in the Military 
Services (active duty or Selected Reserve), NOAA 
Corps, or PHS on the date of approval, is precluded by 
either standard policy (Service or DoD) or statute 
from committing to 4 additional years, and agrees to 
serve for the maximum amount of time allowed by such 
policy or statute.
o	Is or becomes retirement eligible during the period 
from 1 August 2009, through 31 July 2012, and agrees 
to serve the additional period, if any, specified in 
the following subparagraphs.  A Service member is 
considered to be retirement eligible if he or she has 
completed 20 years of active Federal service or 
20 qualifying years as computed pursuant to Title 10, 
United States Code (USC) § 12732.  This subparagraph 
will no longer be in effect on 1 August 2013, and on 
or after that date all members must comply with 
subparagraphs above to be eligible for transfer of 
unused education benefits to family members.
?	For individuals eligible for retirement on 
1 August 2009, no additional service is required.
?	For individuals eligible for retirement after 
1 August 2009, and before 1 August 2010, 1 year 
of additional service is required.
?	For individuals eligible for retirement on or 
after 1 August 2010, and before 1 August 2011, 
2 years of additional service is required.
?	For individuals eligible for retirement on or 
after 1 August 2011, and before 1 August 2012, 
3 years of additional service is required.

*	The provisions of DoDI 1341.13, subparagraph 3.a.(3) will 
apply to Service members recalled to active duty under the 
provisions of Title 10 USC § 688 or members of the 
Individual Ready Reserve ordered to active duty under the 
provisions of Title 10 § 12301(d) only when the active duty 
is for a period of at least 90 days.

________________________________________________________________

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial.  There is no evidence in the 
Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) or the Right Now Technology 
(RNT) that the applicant ever initiated a TEB request.  He 
provides no evidence that he sought counseling at any point 
prior to 13 Aug 13 regarding the Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits, to 
include TEB.  This was well after the applicant’s approved 
retirement effective date of 30 Jun 14, approved on 31 Jul 13, 
which made him ineligible for TEB as he could not serve the four 
year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) In accordance with 
(IAW) AFI 36-2306, Voluntary Education Program, Attachment 
9.A9.18.1.2.  

The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The advisory opinion does not adequately convey the reasons for 
his request and he asks the Board to review the full content of 
his application.

In Aug 09, he was in Korea with a major theater exercise when 
the program was kicked off with an extensive education campaign.  
Further, as a USAFA graduate he was not previously eligible for 
the GI Bill.  If he was informed of the Post 9/11 GI Bill to 
include changes in eligibility requirements for USAFA graduates, 
he would have initiated TEB as he had just over 15 years of 
service.

The advisory opinion reflects that he should have reviewed 
numerous news articles available during the Aug 09 to Jun      
10 timeframe.  The press releases seem to focus on the changes 
in transferability but do not emphasize changes in the 
eligibility for service academy graduates who were previously 
ineligible.  

The advisory opinion, which states, he should have received 
information from news articles is troubling as compared to the 
diligence that the military focuses on signed understandings in 
making other major financial/career decisions.  For example, the 
15-year retirement REDUX decision requires every member to sign 
a form documenting a full understanding of the decision whether 
accepting or not. 

The advisory opinion discusses his retirement date of 1 Jul 14.  
While he had retirement orders since summer 2013, removal of the 
retirement orders is under evaluation in support of Air Force 
needs.  However, he does not believe that factor impacts his 
request for backdated TEB correction.

In further support of his request, the applicant provides a 
personal statement and various other documents in support of his 
request.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, 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 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 compelling 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 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-05062 in Executive Session on 11 Aug 14 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

       , Panel Chair
       , Member
       , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Oct 13, w/atch. 
     Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Record  
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 13 Nov 13.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 14. 
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 31 Jan 14, w/atchs.