DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 § COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2480
UBT
Docket No. NR3933-14
12 Nov 14
SPC er ante nT Oe ete cet ae
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record puxsuant 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 12 November 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. “tn addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinion Furnished by CNRFC ltr 5420 Ser wi/osss5 of 25
Aug 14, 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 making this determination, the Board
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
The Post-9/11 Veterans Fducation Assistance Act {(Post-9/11 GI
Bill, Public Law 110-252) was signed into law on 39 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. This is an
important feature of the law because the transferability
provisions are intended as an incentive vice a benefit. Members
Nocket No. NR3S33-14
who are retired are not eligible to transfer. Information about
the Post-9/11 GI Bili has been readily and publicly available,
and you could have used available resources to educate yourself
on your educational benefits.
Your application claims, essentially, that the “last three vears
un veserve service (JAN 2034 to JAN 274) to he counted towards
amy Post 9/11 GI. Bill eligibility.” On 14 January 2011 you
sinitially submiێted a request to transfer your Post-9/11 GI Bact |
to your dependents. You were rejected for having failed to
. obligated to three years of satisfactory drill participation.
Petitioner further ciaims that he was “never notified by email,
postal mail, or telephone that my application was rejected and
therefore never took immédiate action to resolve the issue."
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. Tf
request is disapproved, member must take corrective action and
reapply.” .
Furthermore, the Board members took into consideration, that on
8 February 2014 Petitioner resubmitted his request to transfer
his Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents and was
approved on 9 February 2014, subsequently acquiring an
obligation end date of 9 February 2018.
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 reques t.
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.
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
evidence within one year from the date of the Board's decision.
- New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in this case. In this regard, it
is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity
Nocket No. NR3933-14
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,,
A thf _
Jb J, O'NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure: CNRFC ltr 5420 Ser N1/0885 of 25 Aug 14
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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR9487 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNRFC Memo 5420 Ser N1/126 of 7 Feb 14, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2082 14
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNRFC memo 5420 Ser N1/1169 of 20 Nov 14, a copy of which is attached. 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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in this case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4117 13
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-314 dtd 17 Sep 13, a copy of which is attached. Members who are retired are not eligible to transfer such benefits. Had you followed up on your application after it was rejected in October 2009, you would have been able to complete any actions necessary to effect the transfer of benefits.
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 | NR8899 14
Your application claims “I was not counseled on the effects of my ability to transfer 9/11 education benefits prior to reenlistment. The Board concurs with the advisory opinion that changing your reenlistment contract from 3 years to 4 years will not satisfy the *service obligation for transferring your Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits since you attempted the transfer in July 2014 vice May 2014. The Board has determined and agrees with the advisory opinion, that if you wish to be eligible to...
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 | 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 | NR2389 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. You also stated in your application that you “submitted a retirement request of 1 August 2014."