RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02587 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits to his spouse and son effective 8 April 2011. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. He received flawed advice from multiple education counselors regarding the transfer of his Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits to his dependent family members. 2. He received his certificate of eligibility (COE) for the Post-9/11 GI Bill, in April 2011, from the Department Veterans Affairs (DVA). His intention for seeking the COE was to transfer these benefits to his dependents. There was no mention on how to transfer these benefits in the letter he received from the DVA. Shortly after he received the COE, he contacted the DVA helpline to inquire how to transfer his educational benefits to his 2-year old son and his spouse. He was notified that he should transfer his education benefits immediately before they enrolled for classes. There was no mention that he would incur an active duty service commitment if he transferred his Post- 9/11 GI Bill educational benefits to his family members. 3. Unsure that the advice he received from the DVA was correct he contacted the education center at the nearest base to his residence via telephone in June 2011 to inquire on how to transfer his education benefits. He asked the counselor on the line if he needed to go to their office to file any paperwork or file anything on-line. He was told that no action was required and that he should make the transfer to his dependents immediately before they sought education in order to be funded by the Post-9/11 GI Bill. There was no mention that he would incur an active duty service commitment if he transferred his Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits to his family members. 4. In early December 2011, he again contacted the DVA help line regarding transfer of his education benefits to his dependents. This phone call was prompted by discussion of the transfer of education benefits with his colleagues. He again was told that he should transfer the education benefits to his family members just prior to them seeking further education. No mention of an ADSC was made. 5. He was on the Air Force Virtual MPF website on 29 May 2012, looking for documents in preparation for an upcoming permanent change of station (PCS) when he discovered the tab regarding the transfer of the GI Bill educational benefits. He clicked on the tab and discovered, for the first time, that if he transferred his education benefits he would incur a four-year ADSC. This ADSC obligation was not mentioned in the COE from the DVA nor in any of the three previous discussions with education counselors as noted above. 6. He contacted the Air Force Personnel Center on 29 May 2012, and was transferred to an Air Force Post-9/11 GI Bill point of contact (POC) who informed him that despite the incorrect information he received from three education counselors on three separate occasions he would incur a four-year ADSC upon the transfer of his education benefits to his family members. 7. The POC recommended that he formally make the transfer of his education benefits effective the date of their conversation. If he did he would effectively incur a four-year ADSC which would push his retirement date to the end of May 2016. The POC also recommended an appeal to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) after the transfer took place to have the ADSC reduced to three years. He suggested to the POC that this advice was not in his best interest as he had definite plans to retire in June 2015. When he asked what recourse he had, given that he had received erroneous advice on multiple occasions, the POC again recommended that he make an application to the AFBCMR. 8. Since his initial inquiry on the transfer of education benefits to his family members in April 2011, his son has been diagnosed with a condition that requires special educational needs. His new duty location fortunately has services in the surrounding community that minimally fit his requirements. However, these services are not as optimal as those that would be available in other locations where there are no military installations nearby. His family's plan is to move to a location that has the best therapeutic options available for his son as soon as he retires from active duty at the end of June 2015. The earlier he is able to have the benefit of better services, the better his son’s prognosis will be for the future. Staying an extra year on active duty service (as would be required if he transferred his education benefits to his family members) would impede his son's development. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of Colonel, (O-6). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military personnel records are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial. DPSIT states the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), DoD, and the military services widely publicized the Post-9/11 GI Bill and the transferability feature. DOD developed a special website, hosted by the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC), to facilitate the transfer of educational benefits. The website system was operational on 27 June 2009 for the purpose of accepting transfer of education benefits applications. The DoD Directive Type Memo (DTM) and AFI 36-2306, Voluntary Education Program, state the transfer must be made while the member is serving in the Armed Forces. Both documents were published on government-hosted websites prior to 1 August 2009, the effective date of the Post-9/11 GI Bill. The applicant did not provide adequate justification or documentation. The applicant states that every time he dealt with the DVA he did what they told him. Had the applicant gone onto the Air Force website to transfer benefits he would have been approved and would have found out about the ADSC he would have incurred as a result of the transfer of education benefits. In addition, if he would have contacted the Air Force Total Force Service Center at Randolph AFB he would have found out that he indeed did not apply for the Transfer of Benefits (TEB) with the Air Force. It is clear throughout this process that the applicant simply failed to apply at the Department of Defense's website (DMDC) to sign up for the TEB benefits. The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response, the applicant reiterates his contentions and clarifies that the VA advisor notified him that no action was required on his behalf at the time of his inquiry and he should only make the transfer of the GI Bill eligibility to his family members shortly before they enrolled for any courses. He was not advised that he should (or could) make the transfer months or years prior to his dependents enrolling in any eligible course and there was no mention of any active duty service commitment (ADSC) that would be incurred for such a transfer of education benefits. The applicant further states he had five interactions with individuals whose job it was to guide him through the transfer of his GI Bill education benefits to his family members. In each case, he was not advised that an ADSC would be incurred and he was not advised of the DoD's transfer of GI Bill benefits website. Web searches led him to the DVA's website in April 20ll and when he could find no information regarding GI Bill eligibility transfer on the DVA's website, he called their help line and received flawed advice. If the advertising of the GI Bill was as robust as suggested by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, then he or at least one of the five counselors mentioned above would have known the process of how to transfer GI Bill benefits to his dependents. The applicant complete response, with attachments of previously submitted documents, is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ 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, to include his rebuttal, we are not persuaded that relief is warranted. The applicant has not provided evidence that he was denied the opportunity to transfer benefits to his dependents or that he was miscounseled. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In view of the above and 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 in Executive Session on 27 March 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-02587: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 June 2012, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 2 July 2012. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 August 2012 Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 11 September 2012, w/atchs Dear: Reference your application submitted under the provisions of AFI 36-2603 (Section 1552, 10 USC), AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-02587. After careful consideration of your application and military records, the Board determined that the evidence you presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice. Accordingly, the Board denied your application. You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for consideration by the Board. In the absence of such additional evidence, a further review of your application is not possible. Attachment: Record of Board Proceedings 5