DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORREUIION UF NAVAL RECORDS
xp r i VT imp Imr f r '
101 SrQU Philo ENMU ee ee
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JET
Docket No. NRO876-14
10 Sep 14
|
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC L552.
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 opinions furnished by HQMC Memo 7220 MPO of 22 Apr 14
and HOMC Memo 7002 MPO of 18 Jul 14, a copies of which are
attached and were previously provided. The Board also
considered your letter with attachments of 19 May 2014 in
response to the advisory opinion of 22 April 2014.
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
the essential components of the new law were widely available
beginning in summer 2008 and specific implementing guidance was
published in the summer qi 2009.
Under the governing regulations, to be eligible to transfer
benefits, a member must be on active duty or in the Selective
Duckett Wo. NROS7o6-14
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
who are retired are not eligible to transfer.
Fvidence shows that you failed to take the steps necessary to
transter benetits. Your application claims, esseulially, that
“T applied for the education benefit in Nov 2009. I had been
forced to retire due to an SRB [Selective Retention Board] held
by HOMC [Headquarters Marine Corps] that has since been
overturned and my MRD [Mandatory Retirement Date] was reverted
back to my original MRD of June 2012. When I originally applied
for the benefit was not eligible to transfer the benefit due to
my retired status."
In Fiscal Year '09 (FY09), the Secretary of the Navy held a
| Colonel Selective Retention Board (SRB). Based on that board,
you were forced to retire on 1 October 2009. At the time you
were forced to retire, you were a part of the RASL (Reserve
Active Status List). 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. The BCNR held a special
board to consider the possibility of reversing your forced
retirement based on the civilian court decision, and heard your
case on 15 February 2013. The Board found in your favor and you
were returned to the RASL with your Mandatory Removal Date
returned to 1 June 2012, and on that date you were retired.
When you were returned to the Reserve Active Status List on 1
June 2012, it was as a member of the Individual Ready Reserve
which did not make you eligible to transfer your Post-9/11 GI
Bill benefits to your dependents. Serving as a member of RASL,
did not allow for you to meet the requirement transferring your
Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to your dependents. You would have
had to transfer to active duty or to the Selective Reserve as
required by law and policy
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
a mn Te. a ea ea en ene le ae ee lll
Docket No. NROé7G-14
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 J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure: 1. HOMC Memo 7220 MPO of 22 Apr 14
2, HOMC Memo 7002 MPO of 18 Jul 14
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3219 14
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by HOMC Memo 7220 MPO of 18 Jul 14, 4 copy of which is attached. Members who are retired ar the 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...
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR6333 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 | ‘provisions are intended as an incentive vice a benefit. 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...
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 | 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 | 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.