RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02291 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While he was still on active duty he requested assistance and instructions from the Barksdale AFB Education Office related to the Post-9/11 GI Bill transfer of benefits application process. He was guided to the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) website where he filled out the appropriate paperwork for eligibility and transfer. He submitted a transfer of benefits application and received confirmation a few weeks later from the DVA that said he was eligible for benefits. He was offered no briefings nor was he counseled that he needed to apply through a Department of Defense (DoD) website in order to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits. It was not until his daughter enrolled at the Art Institute of Las Vegas and financial aid was denied that he discovered his benefits had not been transferred to her. The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant retired in the grade of master sergeant effective 1 Dec 10 after serving 21 years on active duty. Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ USAF/A1PA recommends denial. A1PA states the applicant had access and the opportunity to ensure he correctly transferred his benefits to his daughter before his 1 Dec 10 retirement date. A review of the applicant’s Preseparation Counseling Checklist reflects he was briefed about the Post-9/11 GI Bill and was referred to the Barksdale Base Education Services office for one- on-one educational counseling. Based on education office records he did not take advantage of this opportunity. The Barksdale Education office also advised that they provided mass Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational Benefits briefings for the base-wide population during the summer of 2009, but attendance was not mandatory and they did not keep attendance records. The applicant states he logged onto the DVA website not the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) website. A1PA reviewed the DMDC’s TEB database that confirmed the applicant did not apply to transfer his benefits before his 1 Dec 10 retirement. Additionally, the DVA website does not have an application venue to transfer Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits. Therefore, he could not have applied to transfer his benefits to his daughter through the DVA website. The only method for transferring benefits was through the DMDC TEB site. It is surmised that he applied for his own Certificate of Eligibility and that is the confirmation he received a few weeks later. The applicant did not take the required actions to transfer his benefits. This is not an error on the part of the Air Force. If the applicant had taken advantage of the mass briefings provided or the one-on-one counseling available he could have averted this unfortunate situation. The complete A1PA evaluation is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 5 Aug 11, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has not been received (Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ 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 error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR). While the applicant indicates he was not aware of the requirement to make his transferability election prior to retirement, it appears the Air Force made every reasonable effort to ensure the information was available to the member prior to his retirement. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend favorable consideration of his request. _________________________________________________________________ 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-2011-02291 in Executive Session on 12 Sep 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Jun 11. Exhibit B. Letter, HQ USAF/A1PA, dated 22 Jul 11. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Aug 11.