DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1004
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JET
Docket No. NR5317-14
20 Jan 15
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552,
i
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 20 January 2015. 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 CNPC memo 1780 PERS-314 of 30 Oct
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 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. This is an.
important feature of the law because the transferability
provisions are intended-as an incentive vice a benefit. Members
Docket No. NRS317-14
who are retired are not eligible to transfer their education
benefits.
Evidence shows that you failed to take the steps necessary to
transfer benefits. Your application claims that “In July 2009 I
transferred portions of my Post 911 GI Bill to my spouse and my
son. My spouse started using her benefits right away, but at
the time my son was only in middle school so I didn’t really
follow up on the benefits that I transferred to him.” You have
provided no evidence to substantiate that you transferred
portions of your Post-9/11 GI Bill to your wife and another
portion to your son while you were still on active duty.
The Board concurred with the comments of Navy Personnel
Command’s (PERS-314) advisory opinion, that “A review of ia
Qc cord shows that he only designated a number of months
or a period of use for his dependent Si. 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. One of those
essential procedures states “Members may check TEB periodically
for status of their transfer application. If request is
disapproved, member must take corrective action and reapply.”
You stated in your application that “I was under the impression
that I did everything right with the transfer request, but had
no communication with TEB.” Had you logged back into the TEB
system to verify that both your wife and your son were properly
enrolled, you would have realized that the transfer to your son
was not properly executed as you had expected. You would have
that time up until you retired to correct the problem.
Under these circumstances, the Board found that no relief is
warranted. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members cof the panel will be furnished
upon request.
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
.materiaily add to the Board’s understanding of the issues
involved. Thus, your request for a personal appearance was also
denied.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have.
Docket No. NRS317-14
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
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 J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure: CNPC memo 1780 PERS-314 of 30 Oct 14
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR307 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2014. 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. However, the screen shot of the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) application you printed prior to submitting your application clearly shows two...
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.
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR1676-13
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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNPC Memo 1780 PERS-314 dtd 7 May 13, a copy of which is attached. Information was published in NAVADMINS 187/09 & 203/09 detailing the actions members were required to take to transfer their benefits to their dependents.