RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-01954

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be allowed to transfer her Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to her dependent son. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

As a reservist she had to obtain her GI Bill Certification before she could transfer her benefits to her son.  She was retirement eligible in 2009 and could have transferred the benefit without a service commitment.  However, she was in Germany and was not informed of the 1 Aug 13 deadline.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 14 Jun 87, the applicant was appointed in the Air Force Reserve (USAFR) in the grade of second lieutenant (2Lt, O-1).

On 17 Apr 03, the applicant transferred to the Air National Guard (ANG) in the grade of major (Maj, O-4).

According to the applicant’s Service History Printout, she completed 20 years of satisfactory Federal Service, on or about 14 Nov 05.  

On 1 Jul 15, the applicant was discharged from the Air National Guard (ANG), transferred to the USAFR, and retired in the grade of Lieutenant Colonel (O-5).  She was credited with 30 years, 7 months, and 17 days of satisfactory Federal service.

Transferability of Unused Education Benefits to Family Members. Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) on or after 1 Aug 09 who meets Post-9/11 GI Bill eligibility requirements and at the time of the approval of the member’s request to transfer entitlement to educational assistance the member meets one of the following:

Has at least 6 years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve, NOAA Corps, or PHS) on the date of application and agrees to serve four additional years in the Air Force from the date of request, regardless of the number of months transferred, or

Has at least 10 years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve, NOAA Corps, or PHS) on the date of application, is precluded by either Air Force policy (e.g., High Year Tenure [HYT]), DoD policy or statute from committing to four additional years of service and agrees to serve for the maximum amount of time allowed by such policy or statute.

As the applicant was eligible for retirement prior to 1 Aug 09, she would not have incurred a service commitment if she had transferred her benefits at that time.

Had the applicant elected to transfer her educational benefits on 9 May 14, while on extended active duty, she would have incurred a four-year service commitment that she would have been unable to fulfill by the time she retired/separated on 1 Jul 15.  However, if the applicant had elected to transfer her benefits between 1 Aug 09 and 30 Jun 11, she would have been able to complete her service commitment by her 1 Jul 15 retirement date.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPTT recommends denial.  On 18 Apr 14, the applicant was not eligible to transfer the Post-9/11 benefit.  The applicant could have applied for the transfer of the benefit at any time between 1 Aug 09 and 14 Apr 13 while she was a Selected Reserve member and eligible to do so.

At the time of the applicant’s request (9 May 14), the service commitment, regardless of retirement eligibility, was four years and was to be accomplished in a Selected Reserve status.  The applicant was ineligible at the time of request because she was in a Participating - Individual Ready Reserve status and would not have been able to serve a four year service commitment.

A complete copy of the ARPC/DPTT evaluation, with attachments is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that she did not become eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill until August 2012.  At that time, she lived in Germany with her husband who was stationed there at the time.  In order to apply for the GI Bill, she had to be on active duty orders but at that time, she was an Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) until April 2013.  She was not aware of the bill being passed that required her to apply for eligibility to transfer her GI Bill due to being in Germany.  At the time the bill was passed, she was still trying to get qualified in the system but as a reservist, it had to be verified.  In 2007, she became retirement eligible and being in Germany made it difficult to obtain active duty days.  She was told by the Education Office that she had to be on active duty at least one day in order to apply to transfer the GI Bill to her son.  

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

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 injustice.  We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case and do not find that is supports a determination that she should be allowed to transfer her Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to her dependent son.  We note the applicant contends that she did not become eligible to TEB until Aug 12 and was told she had to be on active duty at least one day in order to do so; however,   the applicant could have applied for TEB anytime between 1 Aug 09 and 14 Apr 13 while she was in a Selected Reserve member status but failed to do so.  Therefore, we find that the applicant has failed to sustain her burden of proof that she has suffered from 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 the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2015-01954 in Executive Session on 5 Apr 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

					 , Panel Chair
					, Member
					  , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 May 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, ARPC/DPTT, dated 28 Jul 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Oct 15.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 17 Nov 15.