RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2016-01061

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His four-year service commitment date for Post-9/11 GI Bill Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) on his Statement of Understanding (SOU) be backdated to 7 Oct 14.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He originally applied for TEB and sent forward his SOU on 7 Oct 10.  He believed his service obligation began at that time and was now completed.  He recently learned, that through no fault of his own, his signed SOU was not received, and he was never informed of this error.  He signed a new SOU, but his service commitment date is now 6 Feb 20.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 13 Sep 95, the applicant was initially commissioned in the Air National Guard.

On 10 Oct 00, the applicant transferred to the Air Force Reserve.

On 9 Mar 16, the applicant signed an SOU establishing a service commitment date of 6 Feb 20.

The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve.

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, indicating there is no evidence of error or injustice.

A review of the TEB website shows the applicant submitted a transfer request on 17 Aug 10, but the request was rejected on 17 Nov 10 due to the lack of a signed SOU.  The applicant claims he returned the signed SOU, but DPTT could not locate the document and the applicant did not retain a copy.

In accordance with Office of Secretary of Defense guidance SuperUser Policy Memo, DPTT can backdate the transfer begin date if there was a technical issue, data issue, or human error (by someone other than the service member).  Because the applicant did not keep a copy of the SOU or email showing delivery, DPTT cannot verify an attempt was made to return the SOU.

The member is able to continue participation as a selected reserve either as an AGR, traditional reserve, or individual mobilization augmentee (IMA) to complete his service commitment.

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

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant provided a letter from a co-worker who stated he experienced the same issue (lost SOU) with the Pittsburgh Education Office in 2010.  Neither the applicant nor the co-worker were aware of any problems, and upon receipt of confirmation from Veterans Affairs, believed the process to be complete.  In 2010, the SOU was signed and submitted at the Education Office, not on the website.

A complete copy of the Applicant’s Rebuttal 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, to include his rebuttal and co-worker’s written statement, in judging the merits of the case.  Additionally, we noted his co-worker retained a copy of the signed SOU and was able to produce it as evidence to adjust the record, whereas the applicant did not produce a copy of his signed SOU.  Consequently, 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 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 requested relief.

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-2016-01061 in Executive Session on 27 Jul 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair
Member
Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-01061 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Mar 16, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Excerpt from Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, ARPC/DPTT, dated 28 Jun 16, w/atchs.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 12 Dec 16, w/atch.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant Rebuttal, dated 20 Dec 16,
w/atch.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations regarding AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-01061, and the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.