IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  16 October 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140002415 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests immediate approval to transfer educational benefits to his dependents under the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) provision of the Post-9/11 GI Bill.

2.  The applicant states he was never told the transfer had to occur while he was on active duty prior to his retirement.  He was never told of the MilConnect system to do this.  He was led to believe that he had to request the transfer from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) when his dependent was ready to attend college.  When he called the VA in January 2014 to prepare for the transfer, the operator directed him to the MilConnect website where it stated the transfer was supposed to be done while he was on active duty.

3.  The applicant provides:

* a self-authored statement
* Orders 208-1310
* Electronic mail (email) correspondence
* Verification of Military Experience and Training (VMET) with Cover Letter
* DA Form 669 (Army Continuing Education System Record)
* Post 9/11 GI Bill handout
* DD Form 2648 (Pre-Separation Counseling Checklist for Active Component Service Members)
* Army Career and Alumni Program Service Provider Referral Information
* Retirement Processing Guide
* Individual Work Center Site Schedule Report
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  After completing over 30 years of honorable service, the applicant was placed on the retired list on 1 June 2012, in the rank/grade of colonel/O-6.

2.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement with his appeal in which he states, in effect:

   a.  He believes he was never told during his retirement out-processing at Fort Jackson, SC, that he must make an irrevocable decision prior to his departure from active duty concerning the transfer of benefits.

   b.  Initially, he mistakenly thought he had done paperwork with the Retirement Officer to keep his option open.  After almost two years, he believes he was mixing it up with the Survivor Benefit Plan paperwork that he had done.

   c.  He was never told about the MilConnect website until January 2014 after an operator at the VA Education Center informed him of it.  He was never told anything about an action on his part to be completed prior to leaving active duty by the Education Center.  They spent time on his VMET file and on his DA Form 669; it is evident he wanted to transfer his benefit at that time based on the notes on the form.  Although he had an appointment with the VA, there is no reference to the MilConnect website.

   d.  He states he received an excellent handout from the Deputy Garrison Commander of Fort Jackson, on 21 February 2014, which would have answered all of his questions and alerted him to take action prior to his separation; however, he never received one.

   e.  He has also looked into the Pre-Separation Counseling Checklist, Army Career and Alumni Program Service Provider Referral Sheet, the Retirement Processing Guide, and the Individual Work Center Site Schedule Report which have many helpful websites, but not the MilConnect website.  The transfer was relatively new and these forms predate its initiation.

   f.  As he departed the military, there were no warnings from other retired or retiring colonels to him because this was so new.  The only two folks he had talked to about this were in the service when they transferred their benefits.  There was no informal network for him to be warned about this, nor had he read anything on it other than a VA website that only outlined the requirements to be able to transfer the benefit.  He met the requirements and thought all was on track.

   g.  Finally, as his final position was as the Deputy Commanding Officer of Fort Jackson, SC, he believed that folks tried to out-process him properly.  He also went to the required sessions, but somehow he slipped through the cracks on this important new transfer requirement.  As he thought the transfer was completed with an application with the VA at the time of enrollment in college, he did not know what he did not know.  Almost two years after the fact, he learned of the error.

   h.  There was no change in his status as he had a job running a homeless center in Columbia, SC, starting on 16 April 2014.  He knew he would do this job, and still is, when he was out-processing in the final stages.  He also knew his last son needed the money for college and still does.  His wife of 27 years could use the benefit should his son be unable to use it.  He is third in order of education needs now and when he retired.  Had he known about the MilConnect website requirement, he would have done it.

3.  Public Law 110-252, as amended by Public Law 111-377, identify the qualifying Title 10 and Title 32 duty that a service member must have performed on or after 11 September 2001 to gain eligibility for the Post-9/11 GI Bill.  Public Law 110-252 also establishes the legal requirements on the transferability of unused Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits.  This law limits the transfer of unused benefits to those members of the Armed Forces who are serving on active duty or as a member of the Selected Reserve on or after 1 August 2009.

4.  The Army, Department of Defense (DOD), and the VA initiated a massive public campaign plan that generated major communications through military, public, and social media venues on the Post-9/11 GI Bill and subsequent transfer of education benefits.  

5.  On 22 June 2009, the DOD established the criteria for eligibility and transfer of unused educational benefits to eligible family members.  The policy states any member of the Armed Forces on or after 1 August 2009 who, at the time of the approval of the individual's request to transfer entitlement to educational assistance under this section, is eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill and:

	a.  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; or

	b.  has at least 10 years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) on the date of election, 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; or
	c.  is or becomes retirement eligible during the period from 1 August 2009 through 1 August 2013.  A service member is considered to be retirement eligible if he or she has completed 20 years of active duty or 20 qualifying years of Reserve service.

6.  The policy further states the Secretaries of the Military Departments will provide active duty participants and members of the Reserve Components with qualifying active duty service individual pre-separation or release from active duty counseling on the benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill and document accordingly and maintain records for individuals who receive supplemental educational assistance under Public Law 110-252, section 3316.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request to correct his record to show he made a timely election to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits has been carefully considered.  However, the governing law is very specific regarding the transfer of benefits.

2.  The applicant appears to have been fully eligible to transfer his education benefits to his family members under the TEB prior to his retirement, but he did not do so.  The program was implemented in July 2009 and he retired on 1 June 2012.  Prior to separation, he admittedly did not apply for the transfer of benefits.  

3.  The DOD, VA, and the Army conducted massive public campaigns that generated major communications through military, public, and social media venues.  The information was published well in advance with emphasis on the criteria.  A Soldier must meet various criteria to qualify to transfer benefits to an eligible dependent; most importantly, the Soldier must be on active duty or in the Selected Reserve at the time of transfer.

4.  His service and sincerity are not in question.  However, in this case, the applicant was not separated until 1 June 2012, almost 3 years after implementation of the program.  As a result, equity relief in this case would not be appropriate given there is no evidence he exercised due diligence and it would be contrary to law.

5.  There is neither an error nor an injustice in the applicant's request to transfer his education benefits. Therefore, he is not entitled to the requested relief.





BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X____  ____X____  ___X_____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      _______ _   __X_____   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140002415





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140002415



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1