AH RNA | PAB
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
RAARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL REMORNS
2 CORRECTION OF IMAM AR Ss ee
hl) ity,
DUANE Po
COURTHOUSE ROAD SUITE 100%
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JET
Docket No. NR3219-14
10 Sep 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 10 September 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 opinion furnished by HOMC Memo 7220 MPO of 18 Jul 14, 4
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 making this determination, the Board
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
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
the essential components of the new law were widely available
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 such benefits.
This is an important feature of the law because the
transferability provisions are intended as an incentive vice a
Docket No. NR3219-174
@
benefit. Members who are retired ar
the benefits.
transfer benefits. Your application claims, that “I was
erroneously denied the ability to convey pest 211 educational
penefits Lu my children.” You sise claim that “At sometime
between April and June 2010, I made the attempt to transfer my
educational benefits to my two oldest children...I was told by
the Staff Non-Commissioned Officer in Charge of the Headquarters
Battalion (Henderson Hall)) S-1 Section that I was ineligible.”
However, you have provided no proof that you were misled or
misinformed you were ineligible or that you made any attempt to
enter the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) website to
transfer the benefits to your children. As previously stated,
information about the Post-9/11 GI Bill has been readily and
publicly available, and you could have used those available
resources to educate yourself on your educational benefits.
Furthermore, your application also claim that “In April of 2OLO,
I contacted Headquarters U.S. Marine Corps, Manpower and Reserve
affairs, (Code MMOA) to let the Colonels’ Monitor know my plans
for retirement. I told him (I can't remember the Colonel's
name) that I planned on retiring in February or March
2011...When he realized that I was a Reservist who was “taken
into sanctuary” beyond 18 years of active duty, he immediately
said that I will be directed to retire on the date when I
reached 20 years of active duty. That date is 30 August 2010.”
Between April 2010 and August 2010 when you retired, there is no
evidence to indicate that you attempted to transfer your Post-
9/11 GI Bill benefits to your dependents, and you were not
required to obligate any additional service obligation.
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
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
a =e — = —
Dacket No NPR2239759-14
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. afficial tecomde.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
‘ : ' ‘ ‘
mast Akan a - Anak ™
existence of probable matevial error oF injustice
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. O’NETLL
Fxecutive Director
Enclosure: HOMC Memo 7220 MPO of 18 Jul 14
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 | NR876 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2014. Because of a civil court case Secretary of the Navy was directed to reconsider his decision made in the Records (BCNR) to consider your case regarding your forced retirement per the FY09 Colonel SRB. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2358 14
This is in reference to your application fo naval record A three-member panel of the Board e session, mber 2014. accordance with administrative Records, sitting in executiv application on 30 Septe injustice were reviewed in regulations and procedures appl Board. ‘3.E, Members may check TES periodically for status of their application.” There is no evidence that you entered the TEB website to transfer your benefits. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3753 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 | CY2013 | NR5905 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 November 2013. 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. You claim that in August 2009 while you were still on active duty, you transferred your Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to your dependents.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1068 14
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by HQMC Memo 4920 MPO of 29 May 14, copy of which 4s attached and was previously sent you, to which you failed to respond. However, the DoD 1341.13 specifically states that ‘an individual may not add family members after retirement or separation from Military Services, uscG, NOAA Corps, or PHS, but may modify the number of months of transferred entitlement or revoke transfer of entitlement after retirement or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5402 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. 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 | NR1626 14
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 14 July 2014. This is an important feature of the law because the transferability Docket Ne.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3138 14
This is an important feature of the law because the transferability Docket No. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board tprior to making#its decision in this case. Consequently, when -appiying 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 | NR5167 14
I was medically separated with 100% service connected disability.” You further claim that “I attended Tap and Tamps in Camp Pendleton and was told that I could transfer my benefits anytime I wanted even after leaving the armed forces.” The Board found you have provided no proof to back up your claim that you were given misleading information on when you could transfer your ‘benefits. considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case. Consequently, when applying for a...