RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-02444 INDEX CODE:	110.02
COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His	separation	code	of	MND	(miscellaneous/general	reasons)	be changed to allow him Montgomery GI Bill eligibility.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was advised he would receive all his benefits, to include the apprenticeship program of the Montgomery GI Bill.

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his separation Special Orders.

The	applicant's	complete	submission,	with	attachments,	is	at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 25 Feb 03, the applicant signed a DD Form 2366, Montgomery GI Bill Act of 1984, Basic Enrollment, indicating he understood he must receive an honorable discharge for service and must complete three years (36 months) of active service before he is entitled to the current rate of monthly benefits. The applicant served for a period of 2 years, 2 months, and 4 days. Since the applicant was discharged for convenience of the government, he would have been eligible for the MGIB had he remained on active duty for 30 months. The other option that would have rendered the applicant eligible would have been a hardship discharge or having a condition that interfered with duty.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states the applicant requested voluntary separation to be effective 22 Apr 05 under the Military Personnel Flight Memorandum (MPFM) 04-35, Air Force Shaping Program, Phase II, specifically under the Limited Active Duty Service Commitment (LADSC) Waiver Program. The LADSC Waiver Program allowed officers and enlisted personnel to either retire

or separate prior to completing specified active duty service commitments inclusive of normal date of separation or expiration of term of service. Attachment 2 of the MPFM stated, ‘‘Personnel who separate will do so under the miscellaneous provisions of AFI 36-3207, Separating Commissioned Officers, paragraph 2.4.17, or AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 2.15.

DPSOS further states the applicant’s separation code was correct under the force shaping program. The implementation guidance implementing the force shaping program provided specific requirements for eligibility under the GI Bill and was posted on an official Air Force website and made available to the applicant.

The complete AFPC/DPSOS evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSITE recommends denial. DPSITE states the applicant elected to participate in the MGIB program upon initial entry into the Air Force and made the $1,200 contribution. However, he did not serve the specified time established for MGIB eligibility.

The complete AFPC/DPSITE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 6 Feb 09 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, this office has not received a response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1.	The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.	The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however,  we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Although, he does not qualify for the Montgomery GI Bill, he qualifies for the Post-9/11 GI Bill which becomes effective 1 August 2009. Therefore, in view of the above and in
1.	
the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2008-02444 in Executive Session on 7 April 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member 
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 26 Jun 08.
Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 5 Nov 08. Exhibit D.	Memorandum, AFPC/DPSITE, dated 21 Jan 09. Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Feb 09.