RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02542
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his 
dependents.

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He requested the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) before he 
retired, but was told he would have to extend his career by 
three years before he could make the transfer.  He stated he 
could not extend due to the fact it was a forced retirement 
because his position was not funded beyond his 20 year point.  

He was told the TEB was not in fact a benefit, but a retention 
tool, and if he did not extend, he could not transfer the 
benefits.

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant retired in the grade of technical sergeant (E-6) 
effective 1 Feb 11 after serving 20 years and 14 days on active 
duty.

Service members enrolled in the Post-9/11 GI Bill program are 
able to transfer unused educational benefits to their spouses or 
children.  Any member of the Armed Forces, active duty or 
Selected Reserve, officer or enlisted, on or after 1 Aug 09 who 
is eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill and has at least six years 
of service in the Armed Forces on the date of election can 
transfer their unused Post-9/11 benefits to their dependents.  
However, the transfer of such entitlement can only be done while 
serving as a member of the Armed Forces when the transfer is 
executed.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________
_

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/A1K recommends denial based on the legislative provisions 
of Title 38, United States Code (38 USC), Chapter 33, for the 
applicant to serve the additional three years of service.  

In accordance with 38 USC, Chapter 33 and AFRCI 36-2102, Air 
Force Reserve Service Commitment Date Program, the applicant 
would incur a service obligation of three years, effective from 
the date of application in the Defense Manpower Data Center 
(DMDC) TEB website.

A1K states the applicant had the option to retire or transfer to 
another duty status, i.e., Traditional Reservist, Individual 
Mobilization Augmentee (IMA), or apply for another AGR position 
and the applicant chose to retire instead of opting to serve the 
three additional years required.

The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 20 Aug 12, 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.  We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation 
of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has 
not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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-2012-02542 in Executive Session on 8 Jan 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 May 12.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 6 Aug 12.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Aug 12.