RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01486

	XXXXXXXX			COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His records be corrected to show he transferred his Post-9/11 educational benefits on 19 Jul 11, the date he initially applied.

2.  The 4-year active duty service commitment (ADSC) he recently obtained from having to reapply for his benefits be removed.    


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He applied for the Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) program in Jul 11 and completed all the necessary documents including the Statement of Understanding (SOU).  At that time he reviewed his benefits and made no further action as his children were still young and did not require access to the benefit.  He was notified two years later that he was missing the SOU and he would have to reapply.  The member was notified 2 years later that he was missing the SOU and would have to reapply. The member states that he reapplied for the benefit which also required a reenlistment well beyond 20 years of service.  He believes this new commitment is unjust as he filled out all the necessary paperwork in Jul 11.   

In support of his appeal the applicant provides a page of his TEB Discussion Thread from 16 Jul 13, indicating that his original application expired and he would need to reapply.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On the date the application was submitted, the applicant was serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of Master Sergeant (MSgt, E-7). His Total Federal Active Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 20 Nov 96.


A record pull from the Automated Records Management System (ARMS), DD Form 4/1, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document, the applicant re-enlisted on 28 Aug 09 for 3 years and 30 months.

On 18 Jul 11, the applicant initially applied for TEB.  On 19 Jul 11 an email from the Total Force Service Center (TFSC) was sent stating that the application was received, indicating that any required extension or reenlistment, as well as, the SOU must be completed within 14 day from the date of application.  On 3 Aug 11, another e-mail from the TFSC was sent stating that his application expired because he did not sign the SOU or he did not acquire the appropriate retainability through extension/reenlistment.

Examiner’s Note:  According to the DD Form 4/1, the applicant would have had the retainability required for TEB at the time of his Jul 11 submission.

On 15 Aug 13, the applicant reapplied for TEB.  On 24 Sep 13, an e-mail from the TFSC was sent stating that his application expired because he did not sign the SOU or he did not acquire the appropriate retainability through extension/reenlistment.

On 5 Feb 14, the applicant reapplied for TEB.  On 7 Mar 14, an e-mail from the TFSC was sent stating that his application expired because he did not sign the SOU or he did not acquire the appropriate retainability through extension/reenlistment.

A record pull from the Automated Records Management System (ARMS), DD Form 4/1, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document, the applicant re-enlisted on 17 Mar 14 for 4 years and 12 months.

Examiner’s Note:  It is possible that his application was being rejected in 2013 and 2014 for retainabiltiy and not the SOU.   

Post-9/11 GI Bill Transferability:  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, may transfer that entitlement provided he or she meets one of these conditions:

* 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.

* 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.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.    


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial.  There is no record the applicant signed his SOU in July 2011. He was sent numerous emails with instructions on what was required to complete his application, but he repeatedly neglected to sign the SOU and therefore his applications were disapproved. Without a signed SOU, Total Force Service Center personnel cannot determine if the member accepts the 4 year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC); therefore, no eligibility for the program could be established, as the law/regulations cite the date of request as the date on which the appropriate service obligation would be established (REF: AFI 36-2306, Attachment 9, A9.18.l.2, A9.18.l.3 and A9.18.l.4). Without a signed SOU, the TEB application cannot be approved.

If the Board feels an injustice has occurred and decides to approve the case, the TEB approval date would be 18 Jul 11, with an obligation end/ADSC date of 17 Jul 14.  

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


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 4 Aug 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C).  As of this date no response has been received. 


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 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 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-2014-01486 in Executive Session on 20 Feb 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		XXXXXXXXXX
		XXXXXXXXXX
		XXXXXXXXXX

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Mar 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT dated 29 May 14 w/atchs.
Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Aug 14.