RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2014-03596
		
      XXXXXXXXXXXXX			COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits (TEB) to his dependents.  


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He elected to separate under the voluntary portion of the Enhanced Selective Early Retirement Board (ESERB) program, but he did not understand this would leave him ineligible to transfer his TEB benefits to his dependents.  He does not believe the Air Force would expect/desire him to be retained for an additional four years.  After having discussed this with the AFPC staff; he now understands the Air Force’s interpretation of this policy.  However, in reviewing the applicable laws/policies, he believes his misunderstanding to be reasonable and requests he be allowed to transfer his education benefits to his dependents.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal letter to the board, which provides a detailed explanation of his situation and rationale, and the “Statement of Understanding for Member Applying for ESERB.”

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant retired from the Air Force in the grade of Colonel (O-6) effective 1 Jan 15.  

On 12 Feb 14, the applicant submitted an application for Voluntary Retirement under ESERB, Personnel Services Delivery Memorandum (PSDM-14-04), requesting a 1 Jan 15 retirement date.  

On 14 Feb 14, the applicant signed the “Retirement Pre-Application Checklist,” acknowledging the information in 
Section 2: Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bill counseling.

On 18 Feb 14, the applicant signed the Statement of Understanding for applying for Voluntary Retirement in Lieu of an ESERB.  

According to PSDM-14-04, Impact on Montgomery GI Bill and 
Post-9/11 GI Bill Benefits: 

“If a member, previously approved for transfer of benefits and serving the required service obligation period, is selected for SERB by the Board (involuntary force shaping or reduction in force), the member's service obligation will be treated by DVA as "complete" so long as member serves the time allowed based on the service discharge characterization. However, if a member waits to transfer benefits until after receiving notice of selection by a SERB board, the member cannot be approved for transfer of benefits since there is not sufficient retainability for a 4-year service obligation.

Additionally, officers who elect to voluntarily separate/retire in lieu of meeting the SERB, without completing their Post-9/11 GI Bill Active Duty Service Commitment, may forfeit the transferred benefit, and any benefits that dependents used may be treated as an overpayment subject to recoupment by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).”

On 13 Aug 14, the applicant applied for TEB.  Had his TEB been approved he would have incurred a 4 year ADSC to 12 Aug 18.  Since the applicant did not apply prior to being notified of the SERB, his TEB application could not be accepted.    

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is included at Exhibit B.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial.  The applicant's TEB application was properly reviewed and disapproved based on his status on the date of request (13 Aug 14).  In order for the applicant to retain TEB benefits, he had to serve to/through the Obligation End Date of 12 Aug 18.  Because the applicant was approved for a voluntary retirement prior to the date of his TEB request, member is ineligible for TEB IAW AFI 36-2306, Attachment 9, A9.18.8.5. 

There is no injustice on the part of the Air Force.  Applicant received proper counseling in all aspects of his voluntary retirement.  The applicant acknowledged the information in his Retirement Pre-Application Checklist about facts concerning the Post-9/11 GI Bill TEB.  Also, the PSDM specifically states that if the applicant waits to transfer benefits until after receiving notice of selection by a SERB board, the applicant cannot be approved for the TEB since there is not sufficient retainability for the 4-year ADSC.  The applicant’s retirement application was approved on 27 Feb 14; therefore, the applicant was ineligible to apply for the TEB.

A complete copy of the AFPC/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 17 Nov 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C).  

The applicant states, that he does not contest that he acknowledged counseling on the GI Bill benefits in the checklist and Memorandum of Understanding for retirement; however, the only specific counseling he received on TEB, was in the Executive Transition Assistance Program (ETAP) class he attended, and as noted in his package, this left him with the understanding that he could transfer his benefits to his dependents as long as he did this prior to separating from active duty.

DPSIT cites that he would have "to serve to/through the Obligation End Date of 12 Aug 18.”  While he selected the latest retirement date allowed under the ESERB rules, continuing to serve for four more years was inconsistent at the time with the Air Force’s force structure goals and his specific situation of being in a very high risk category of the ESERB.  It now seems unjust that he would be denied this benefit because he would not serve an additional four years (which would put him over 30 years), when the AF goals were to reduce his demographic in the force structure.  He did not believe then, nor does he believe now that there is any way for him to serve an additional four years based on the AF’s policies. This being the case, consistent with paragraph A9.18.1.3 of AFI 36-2306, he has served well in excess of 10 years, he is unable to accept the additional four years of retainability, and has served out the maximum amount of time allowed in his situation.  These are the conditions for eligibility outlined in this paragraph.

A complete copy of the applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit D.


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.  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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or 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-2014-03596 in Executive Session on Tuesday, 
14 Jul 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Sep 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 20 Oct 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Nov 14.
	Exhibit D.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 19 Nov 14.