DEPARTWIENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
sha e PALIPTHUMIICE POAM SUITE ff
761 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 100%
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JET
Docket No. NR0O307-14
11 Aug 14
|
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 11 August 2014. 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 opinions furnished by CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-314 of 12 Mar
14 and CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-314 of 11 Jun 14, copies of which are
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 making this determination, the Board
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinions.
The Post-9/11 Veterans Education Assistance 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
beginning in summer 2008 and specific implementing guidance was
published in the summer of 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
Docket No. NRO307-14
provisions are intended as an incentive vice a benefit. Members
who are retired are not eligible to transite.
Evidence shows that you Failed to take the steps necessary Lo
transfer benefits. Your application claims, essentially, that
“The record does not reflect the actions I took to assign
“Transfer of Education” Benefits to my dependents. Il completed
all of the requirements while on active duty yet my dependents
do not show on the VA’s records”. Furthermore, your application
also claims that “I don’t believe any blocks were missed on our
final TEB submission”. However, the screen shot of the Transfer
of Education Benefits (TEB) application you printed prior to
submitting your application clearly shows two warnings that the
“post-9/11 GI Bill Chapter 33" block was not checked as was
required. The first warning at the top of the screen shot of
the application had the warning “Election Type of Post-9/11 GI
Bill Chapter 33 is required” before you get to anything else on
the application. The next warning “Select the educational
program from which to transfer benefits” is stated right above
the “Post-9/11 GI Bill Chapter 33" box to be checked, and before
the “List of Family Members” section. Neglect in checking this
important box would have resulted in your application not being
properly submitted.
The Board 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.
One of those essential procedures states “Members may check TEB
periodically for status of their transfer application. LE
request is disapproved, member must take corrective action and
reapply.” According to Navy Personnel Command (NPC) PERS-314,
“There is no record of NDCM Briggs submitting a TEB application
attempting to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill entitlement.”
Furthermore, if after as you claim that you had submitted the
TEB application, you had printed another screen shot, you would
have noticed whether or not the status block on the application
indicated that it had been submitted or if it still had the
error messages as listed on the screen shot you submitted with
your application. You have provided no proof that you completed
and submitted the TEB application with all blocks checked as was
required for the application to go through and be successfully
submitted, and that it was not submitted because of a computer
error.
The Board members also considered your request for a personal
appearance; however, they found that the issues in the case were
adequately documented and that a personal appearance would not
Docket No. NRO307-14
materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues
involved. Thus, your request for a personal appearance has been
denied.
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,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosures: 1. CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-314 of 12 Mar 14
2, CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-314 of 11 Jun 14
Ld
Eee
mm ll TI TE a a ial ....— ae ere
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...
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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR7632 13
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. This is an important feature of the law because the transferability Docket No. 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 | NR2476 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-314 o— 1 Jul 14, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden igs on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
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 | NR7582 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 transfer of Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits requires military members, active and selective reserve, to log into the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) website and transfer the benefits. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6879 14
NR6879-14 application claims, “I was not informed of the two year requirement to transfer my GI Bill would take effect at the time of transfer.” In reviewing your record, however, the Board concurred with NAVADMIN 203/09 states “For those eligible for retirement on or after 1 August 2011 and before 1 August 2012, three years of additional service is required.” Therefore since you did not have an additional three years of remaining service, you were ineligible to transfer your Post-9/1i1 GI...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4914 14
In August 2011, NAVADMIN 235/11 changed this requirement and established a deadline for transfer of eligibility of August 1, 2013. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Beginning 1 August 2013, DoD Policy requires that all service members who wish to transfer their education benefits to a family member obligate for an additional four years of service regardless of their time in service or retirement date.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9375 14
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 the benefits. NR9375-14 daughter's cane the application but is appears that her name was dropped.” e Board concurs with the advisory opinion that a review of your record shows that you initially designated 18 months to your son, but later went back and modified it to 16 months.