DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 §. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JET
Docket No. 3847-12
9 Oct. 12
Dear Master Sergeant eee |
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 15524
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 9 October 2012. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinion furnished by HOMC Memo 1560 MFR-1 dtd 7 Jun 2 y
a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
The Post 9/11 Veterans Education Assistant Act (Post 9/11 GI
Bill, Public Law 110-252) was signed into law on 30 June 2008
and became effective on 1 August 2009. General descriptions of
the essential components of the new law were widely available
beginning in summer 2008 and specific implementing guidance was
published in the summer ef -2009.
Under the governing regulations, to be eligible to transfer
benefits, a member must be on active duty or in the selective
reserve at the time of the election to transfer. This is an
important feature of the law because the transferability
provisions are intended as an incentive vice a benefit,. Members
who are retired are not eligible to transfer.
Docket No. 3847-12
Evidence shows that you failed to take the steps necessary to
transfer benefits. Your application claims, essentially, that
‘at the time of my retirement my admin department was unable to
provide me with the accurate information about transferring my
GI Bill benefits because I went on terminal leave on 20 June,
the guideline/criteria were not established until June 2009”.
In the Board's view, your lack of knowledge of the transfer
procedures does not excuse your failure to make a timely
application. Persons who deal with the government are expected
to know the laws and regulations that govern those relations.
It is the duty of persons dealing with the government to make
themselves aware of their entitlement to benefits. Nothing
prevented you from learning about this program and meeting the
eligibility requirements. The information was widely available.
You could have found information regarding your eligibility
yourself prior to your eventual retirement on 30 September 2009.
Under these circumstances, the Board found that no relief is
warranted. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
Executive
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05402-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2011. Under the governing regulations, to be eligible to transfer benefits, a member must be on active duty or in the selected reserve at the time of the election to transfer. Your application claims, essentially, that your failure shoulda be excused because you were erroneously informed by the Navy College Office that you were “good to go” aiter...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3895 14
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by HOMC memo 7220 MPO of 22 Sep 14, a copy of which is attached. Accordingly, your application has been denied. NR3895-14 for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5637 14
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR773 14
Members who are retired are not ¢€ the benefits. Because my retirement date followed 50 closely behind the 1 memo (2270un2002) , the memo was release of the Post 9/11 GI Bil not well known at my command and key points of the memo were not ement.” However, the Board disseminated to me before my retir formation about the Post-9/11 found that whether as you claim in GI Bill was not disseminated to you or the command before your retirement, information about the Post-9/1i GI Billi has...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR9235 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Therefore I signed on for four years into the Navy Reserves to meet this stipulation.” you further claim that after your wife applied for and was accepted at a university, that “It has now come to my attention, as I tried to transfer my benefits and got denied, that I was wrongfully informed...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5730 14
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8068 14
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board has determined, -however, that regardless of who was with you when you claim to have :made the transfer of benefits, there is no evidence of you having ever “transferred your Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to your dependents. Furthermore, the Board found that even there was evidence to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5095 14
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Members who are retired are not eligible to transfer the benefits. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7359 14
The Board found that in 2011 as you claim, you initially submitted a request to transfer your ‘Post-9/11 GI Bill to your dependents. The Board also determined that NAVADMIN 203/09 published in June 2009 provided the procedures members are required to follow to transfer the Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to their family members. If request is disapproved, member must take corrective action and reapply.” Furthermore, the Board members took into consideration, that on 29 January 2014 you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5317 14
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNPC memo 1780 PERS-314 of 30 Oct 14, a copy of which is attached. All other dependents have “zero” for number of months and do not have a transfer begin or end date.“ The Board further found that NAVADMIN 203/09 published in June 2009 provided the procedures members are required to follow to transfer the Post - 9/11 GI Bill benefits to their family members. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the...