RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01898 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He requests his retirement date be changed from 1 July 2009 to 1 September 2009 in order to gain eligibility for the Post 9/11 GI Bill and its provisions to transfer educational benefits (TEB) to a dependent. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His retirement date was driven by the needs of the Air Force and not his own. His retirement date was established without any Air Force program counseling or consideration of the impact it would have on his eligibility for the TEB. He attempted to change his retirement date while on active duty, but was advised he did not have sufficient reason. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement, retirement orders, ARPC Factsheet on the AFBCMR process, a leave statement, and two letters of support. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who entered active duty on 22 April 1983. He was progressively promoted to the grade of colonel (O-6) effective 1 August 2002. On 27 February 2009, the applicant voluntarily requested to retire effective 1 July 2009. On 2 March 2009, the Air Force approved his request to retire effective 1 July 2009 and, on 3 March 2009, issued retirement orders. He was honorably discharged from active duty on 30 June 2009 and retired effective 1 July 2009 in the grade of colonel. He served 26 years, 4 months, and 5 days on active duty. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. DPSOR states the law and guidance concerning the Post 9/11 GI Bill transferability option clearly states that a member must be on active duty in order to apply for TEB. The applicant requested voluntary retirement to be effective 1 July 2009 taking into consideration that he would be selected for assignment on 9 July 2009. The effective date of the Post 9/11 GI Bill was 1 August 2009 and, in order to apply for the option to transfer benefits the member had to be on active duty on 1 August 2009. The applicant having voluntarily requested to retire 1 July 2009 was not eligible for the option to transfer his GI Bill benefits. On 9 July 2009, the Air Force issued policy allowing a one-time extension of retirement dates from 1 August 2009 to 1 September 2009 so members could apply for the option to transfer their GI Bill benefits 1-31 August 2009. Members who were not eligible for the one-month retirement date extension were those with a Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) established by law, who declined a Permanent Change of Station (PCS), temporary duty (TDY), or training, or whose 1 August 2009 was based upon enlisted High Year of Tenure (HYT) policy. The applicant had already retired 1 July 2009, so this one-time one-month policy did not apply to him. In addition, if he had requested a 1 August 2009 retirement instead of 1 July 2009, this one-time extension from 1 August to 1 September 2009 would not have applied to him because he retired in lieu of a 9 January 2009 assignment selection date (ASD). The complete DPSOR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSI recommends denial. DPSI states that the Department of Defense (DoD) issued a regulation, Directive Type Memo (DTM) 09- 003 (reissued 10 September 2010), that authorized a servicemember that had an approved retirement date after 1 August 2009 and before 1 July 2010, to participate in the transfer of benefits without incurring additional service obligation. However, the transfer of benefits must be accomplished while serving as a member of the Armed Forces. DPSI indicates that the applicant has the Post 9/11 GI Bill for his own use but is not eligible to participate in the Post 9/11 GI Bill transfer option since he was not serving as a member of the Armed Forces on or after 1 August 2009. To approve the applicant’s request would violate Title 38, United States Code, Chapter 33, Post 9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008 and DTM 09-003. The complete AFPC/DPSI evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He believes the Air Force did not adequately advise and make provisions for him to be eligible for the TEB. Given the circumstances of the establishment of his retirement date, his good faith attempts to change it, and the timing of the 22 June 2009 OASD DTM prior to his 1 July 2009 retirement, he contends there was Air Force responsibility, opportunity, and process that would have allowed him to change his retirement date to 1 September 2009 and make him eligible for the TEB. The applicant’s complete rebuttal is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or an 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 that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. We note the applicant’s assertion that he suffered an injustice when he was denied changing his retirement effective date from 1 July 2009 to 1 September 2009 in order to take advantage of the Post 9/11 GI Bill TEB; however, he has not provided sufficient evidence to support that he was treated any differently than other members in a similar situation. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. _________________________________________________________________ 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01898 in Executive Session on 11 February 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01898: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 May 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 4 Jun 10, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSI, dated 15 Nov 10. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Nov 10. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 26 Dec 10. Panel Chair