Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8068 14
Original file (NR8068 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

JET
Docket No. NR8068-14
4 May 15

 

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

27 April 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 23 December 2014, 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. Tm
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 benefit. Members who are retired are not
eligible to transfer the benefits.

Your application claims “On January 08, 2010, I was still on active
duty and I was assisted by my Command Career Counselor HM1(SW/AW)
Catherine Llavona and she helped me step by step on how to transfer
Docket No. NR8068-14

my Post 9/11 educational benefits to my dependent (daughter) Brittney
D. Vela. After I completed the transfer, I never got a response or
Clarification from DMDC.” You've provided email communication between
yourself and Petty Officer Llavona, with her attesting to the fact
that she was with you when you used “your” CAC card to enter the
Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) website to transfer your Post-
9/11 GI Bill benefits to your dependents. 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 show that
you had attempted to transfer your Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to your
dependents; you did not meet one on the requirements of the Post9/11
GI Bill transfer policies. NAVADMIN 203/09 dated 11 July 2009 states,
“For those eligible for retirement on or after 1 August 2011 and
before 1 August 2012, three years of additional service is required.”
You retired on 31 January 2012; therefore since you did not have an
additional three years of remaining service, you were ineligible to
transfer your Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits. 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 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 23 Dec 14

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR773 14

    Original file (NR773 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | NR307 14

    Original file (NR307 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | NR5095 14

    Original file (NR5095 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | NR5317 14

    Original file (NR5317 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | NR5637 14

    Original file (NR5637 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | NR6879 14

    Original file (NR6879 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | NR2389 14

    Original file (NR2389 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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."

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4914 14

    Original file (NR4914 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | NR4117 13

    Original file (NR4117 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | NR7632 13

    Original file (NR7632 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.