Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03660
Original file (BC-2012-03660.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03660 
COUNSEL: NO 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
He  be  allowed  to  transfer  his  Post-9/11  GI  Bill  education 
benefits to his dependents. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
On  15  Oct  09,  he  completed  actions  to  transfer  100  percent  of 
his Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits to his son.  Two days 
later, he completed actions to transfer half of his benefits to 
his daughter.  His son has successfully used his portion of the 
benefits;  however,  upon  checking  to  ensure  his  daughter  could 
start  using  her  portion,  he  discovered  that  his  second 
transaction did not take effect.   
 
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
On  1  Nov  10,  the  applicant  retired  in  the  grade  of  lieutenant 
colonel.    He  served  20  years  and  27  days  of  total  active 
service.  
 
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained  in  the  letter  prepared  by  the  appropriate  office  of 
the Air Force, which is contained at Exhibit C. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSIT  recommends  denial.    DPSIT  states  that  the  applicant 
did  not  provide  adequate  justification  or  documentation  there 
was  an  error  on  the  part  of  the  Air  Force.    He  simply  states 
after  transferring  all  36  months  of  his  Post-9/11  GI  Bill 
education benefits to his son, he went back to transfer half of 
his  Post-9/11  GI  Bill  education  benefits  to  his  daughter.  
However, there is no documentation supporting his request.   
 
On  21  Jul  09,  the  applicant  was  counseled  by  the  education 
office.  The counseling notes reflect the applicant was “advised 

to  monitor  the  Department  of  Veterans  Affairs  (DVA),  the  Air 
Force  Personnel  Center  (AFPC),  and  the  Transfer  of  Educational 
Benefits (TEB) website for updates and status.”   
 
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,  with  attachments,  is  at  Exhibit 
C. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
By letter dated 17 Sep 12, the applicant clarified his original 
contentions.    On  15  Oct  09,  he  went  into  the  TEB  website.    He 
thought  there  might  be  a  discrepancy  with  the  number  of  months 
he was eligible for, so he transferred all 36 months of his TEB 
to  his  son.    The  following  day  he  contacted  the  VA  to  get 
clarification and the method used for calculation was explained 
to  him,  and  he  was  reminded  that  all  transfers  had  to  be 
completed  while  on  active  duty.    On  17  Oct  09,  he  transferred 
18 months  of  TEB  to  his  daughter.    Following  his  daughter’s 
graduation  from  high  school,  he  discovered  that  his  second 
transfer  did  not  take  effect.    He  has  no  documentation  proving 
the second transaction took place, only his recollection of the 
events at the time. 
 
The applicant’s complete response 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 not timely filed. 
 
3.  Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  an  error  or  injustice.    The 
applicant's complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and his 
contentions  were  duly  noted.    However,  we  do  not  find  the 
applicant’s  assertions  sufficiently  persuasive  to  override  the 
rationale  provided  by  the  Air  Force  office  of  primary 
responsibility.    Therefore,  we  agree  with  the  opinion  and 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 
and  adopt  its  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our  decision  the 
applicant  has  failed  to  sustain  his  burden  of  the  existence  of 
an error or injustice.  In view of the above and in the absence 

2 
 
 

of  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no  basis  to  recommend 
granting the relief sought. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
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  BC-2012-
03660 in Executive Session on 11 Feb 13, under the provisions of 
AFI 36-2603: 
 

 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Jul 12. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Record. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 27 Aug 12, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Sep 12.  
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 17 Sep 12. 
 
 
 
 
                                   
                                  Acting Panel Chair 

 
 
 

Panel Chair 
Member 
Member 

3 
 
 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00168

    Original file (BC 2014 00168.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is included at Exhibit E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends granting the applicant’s request noting the applicant may not have received accurate information regarding transferring education benefits to his dependents. Service members of the Armed Forces who, on or after 1 Aug 09, eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill, had...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04093

    Original file (BC-2012-04093.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    After retiring and applying for one of his children to receive the benefit, he was told there was no record of his transaction. 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 EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial, indicating the Post-9/11 GI Bill, Chapter 33 became effective 1 Aug 09. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 03656

    Original file (BC 2012 03656.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03656 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer an additional 18 months of Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits to his son. In this respect, while the record reflects the applicant was able to transfer half of the benefit to his eldest son prior to retirement, it...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03178

    Original file (BC 2013 03178.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty or Selected Reserve, officer or enlisted) on or after 1 Aug 09, 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 election. In 2008, the Education Office did properly brief the applicant that Post-9/11 GI Bill can be used up to 15 years after separation/retirement; however, the Transfer of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 04059

    Original file (BC 2014 04059.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04059 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His ability to transfer any/all remaining Post 9/11 GI Bill Education Benefits to his daughter be restored. While we acknowledge the applicant’s request to transfer Post- 9/11 GI Bill education benefits to his daughter, we do not believe he has demonstrated evidence of an injustice. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02440

    Original file (BC 2014 02440.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, because of the HYT program (technical sergeants are unable to serve more than 20 years) he was required to retire/separate no later than 1 Nov 13, which precluded him from obtaining the typical four years of retainability required to transfer his benefits. Furthermore, in accordance with AFI 36-2306 the applicant had over 10 years of service on the date of election and at the time he initiated the transfer he agreed to serve the maximum amount allowed by policy, which was in fact...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03405

    Original file (BC 2014 03405.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DVA counselor did not mention anything about ensuring he transferred months to his dependents prior to retirement. It stated ‘upon approval, family members may apply to use transferred benefits with the DVA by completing a DVA Form 22-1990e.” But there was no mention that it had to be done before retirement. While the applicant’s review states the 18 Jul 09 DVA letter is confusing on what needed to be done and does not mention the TEB application had to be completed before retirement,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04298

    Original file (BC 2013 04298.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04928 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 on 17 Aug 11. He should be granted the 17 Aug 11 TEB transfer date because he met the requirements by signing the AF Form 4406, Post-9/11 GI Bill Transfer of Educational Benefits Statement of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03441

    Original file (BC-2012-03441.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He completed the submission portion of the Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) for his daughter in Sep or Oct 09, transferring 100 percent of his benefits at that time. In Sep or Oct 09, he "transferred" his education benefits to his daughter, but there is no record of him doing the transfer. Since, he had completed that portion of the process the information was not new to him.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01847

    Original file (BC-2012-01847.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01847 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His remaining active duty service commitment (ADSC) for the Post-9/11 GI Bill Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) be waived. Post 9/11 GI Bill: Any member of the Armed Forces, active duty or Selected Reserve, officer or enlisted, on or after 1 Aug...