RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-05021

  						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefit to his spouse.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He completed the documents to transfer the benefit to his spouse when processing for retirement.  He never received notification the transfer was completed nor was he informed that a confirmation letter would be sent.  

The applicant’s complete submission and subsequent spouse submission, with attachments, are at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 30 Jan 90.

On 12 Aug 10, the applicant singed his DD Form 2648, Preseparation Counseling Checklist for Active Component Service Members, indicating his desire for education benefits counseling.

On 1 Feb 11, the applicant retired and was credited with 21 years and 1 day of active service.  

For the first time in history, service members enrolled in the Post-9/11 GI Bill Program are able to transfer unused educational benefits to their dependent 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 Bill, has at least six years of service in the Armed Force on the date of election, and agrees to serve 4 additional years in the Armed Forces from the date of election can transfer their unused Post-9/11 benefits to their dependents (Title 38 USC, Chapter 33, § 3319(b)(1)).  Title 38 USC, Chapter 33, § 3319(f)(1) adds that 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 memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.  

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP3SA recommends denial indicating the applicant did not provide evidence of an error or an injustice on the part of the Air Force.  There is no evidence in the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) database the applicant applied for Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) nor, according to the Right Now Technology, did he inquire with Total Force Service Center (TFSC) personnel regarding the TEB program prior to retirement; therefore, eligibility could not be determined.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP3SA evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 10 May 16 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After a careful review of the applicant's contentions, documentation submitted in support of the request, and the available evidence of record, we are not convinced the applicant has provided sufficient evidence for us to conclude that he is the victim of an error or injustice.  We also note the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years prior to receipt of the application, we believe a reasonable date of discovery was more than three years prior to receipt of the application.  Therefore, because we do not find it would be in the interest of justice to recommend granting relief, and the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file the application.  Accordingly, we find the application untimely.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-05021 in Executive Session on 15 Feb 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Nov 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP3SA, dated 16 Mar 16.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 May 16.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.