Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01014
Original file (BC-2012-01014.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
 
DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-01014 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

IN THE MATTER OF:   
   
   
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
1.  Her  DD  Form  214,  Certificate  of  Release  or  Discharge  from 
Active  Duty,  be  amended  in  item  12b  to  reflect  a  date  of 
separation of 1 August 2009 rather than 14 July 2009. 
 
2.  She be allowed to transfer her Post 9/11 GI Bill Transfer of 
Educational Benefits (TEB) to her dependents. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
She  was  not  advised  prior  to  her  separation  that  she  had  to 
transfer her benefits while still on active duty and that she was 
to serve on or after 1 August 2009.  She separated 14 July 2009 – 
two  weeks  shy  of  meeting  this  requirement.    She  served  her 
country  honorably  for  11  years  –  serving  in  Iraq,  Kuwait  and 
Afghanistan.  If she had been aware of the requirements prior to 
separation she could have extended her enlistment. 
 
The  applicant's  complete  submission,  with  attachment,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The 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: 
 
DPSOS  recommends  denial.    DPSOS  states  the  applicant  did  not 
provide  any  evidence  of  an  error  of  injustice  to  warrant  the 
requested  change  to  her  separation  date.    Based  on  the 
documentation  on  file  in  the  master  personnel  records,  the 
discharge,  to  include  her  separation  date  as  reflected  on  her 
DD Form 214, was in accordance with the governing instruction. 
 
The DPSOS complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. 
 
 

 
DPSIT  recommends  denial.    DPSIT  states  the  applicant  was 
separated  effective  14  July  2009.    The  program  for  TEB  started 
1 August  2009.    The  applicant  was  eligible  to  reenlist  but 
elected  to  separate.    Had  the  member  contacted  her  education 
center  she  would  have  received  guidance  on  the  Transfer  of 
Education benefits as the DTM 09-003 Post 9/11 GI Bill Directive 
was  published  and  available  to  all  Education  Centers  as  of  22 
June 2009.  There has been no injustice to the extent that the 
service member did not receive adequate counseling as required by 
law and DoD regulation. 
 
The DPSIT complete evaluation is at Exhibit c. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
On  19  June  2012,  copies  of  the  Air  Force  evaluations  were 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days 
(Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
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 
applicant’s  contentions  are  duly  noted;  however,  we  agree  with 
the  opinions  and  recommendations  of  the  Air  Force  offices  of 
primary responsibility and adopt their 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. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

2 
 

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-2012-01014 in Executive Session on 27 March 2013, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
The  following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-01014 was considered: 
 
  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 March 2012, w/atch. 
  Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 11 May 2012. 
  Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 22 May 2012. 
  Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 June 2012. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

3 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04229

    Original file (BC-2010-04229.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was never informed her benefits had to be transferred prior to her retirement in November 2009. The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates she was unable to transfer her benefits because the TEB system did not recognize her family members and there was no one to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01349

    Original file (BC-2012-01349.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application arecontained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of theAir Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial noting the applicant has not provided any evidence showing she did not receive counseling onthe transfer of Post-9/11 education benefits. Any member of the ArmedForces, active duty or Selected Reserves, officer, or enlisted, on or after 1 August 2009, who is eligible for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04008

    Original file (BC-2011-04008.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After retiring on 1 September 2010, she called to have her GI Bill benefits transferred to her stepson. Title 38 U.S.C 3323(b)(1) and (2) required the Secretary to provide members information on the Post-9/11 GI Bill and required the Military Departments to provide and document individuals pre-separation or release from active duty counseling on the Post-9/11 GI Bill. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02326

    Original file (BC 2013 02326.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, item 15a Member Contributed to Post-Vietnam Era Veterans’ Educational Assistance Program, be amended to reflect “YES.” ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was not aware of the requirement to transfer education benefits while on active duty nor was she counseled on the TEB process prior to retirement. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00265

    Original file (BC-2013-00265.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends approval of the applicant’s initial application on 29 January 2010, with an ADSC adjustment to 28 January 2014. ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-00265 in Executive Session on 4 November 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: All members voted to correct the records as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04835

    Original file (BC 2013 04835.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Post-9/11 GI Bill Transferability: Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) who meets Post- 9/11 GI Bill eligibility requirements and at the time of the approval of the member’s request to transfer entitlement to educational assistance: Has at least six years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) on the date of election and agrees to serve four additional years in the Air Force from the date of request, regardless of the number of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04365

    Original file (BC 2013 04365.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of her request the applicant provides copies of her AF Form 4406, Post-9/11 GI Bill Transfer of Educational Benefits Statement of Understanding (SOU) and AF Form 1411, Extension or Cancellation of Extensions of Enlistment in the Regular Air Force (REGAF) Air Force Reserve (AF Reserve) Air National Guard (ANG). Post-9/11 GI Bill Transferability: Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) who meets Post- 9/11 GI Bill eligibility requirements and at the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00880

    Original file (BC-2010-00880.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, the Board could find that there was an injustice if the members were on active duty on 1 Aug 09, were not personally counseled about the need to execute a transfer while serving in the Armed Forces, and did not have ready access to DoD and Air Force guidance because of their terminal leave status. The transfer date could be effective as early as 1 Aug 09 and there would be no need to place the member on active duty since the TEB system allows for correction of the record by Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-04574

    Original file (BC-2009-04574.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining 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 C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial. However, the Board could find that there was an injustice if the members were on active duty on 1 Aug 09, were not personally counseled about the need to execute a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04006

    Original file (BC-2012-04006.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPSIT recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. By the time she completed the process to extend on active duty, signed the SOU, and received approval for TEB she had an outstanding...