RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2016-01119

 						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to transfer this Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational Benefits (TEB) to his dependents.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was told he could not transfer his educational benefits to his dependents because he was twice passed over for promotion to Lieutenant Colonel and given a mandatory separation date.

He retained his educational benefits for himself in case he was required to obtain additional education in support of his Air Force career, but now that he has a mandatory separation date, he does not have the required retainability.

He had not previously been informed being passed over would make him ineligible to transfer his benefits.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 15 Jan 97, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force.

On 14 Jan 00, the applicant was commissioned in the Regular Air Force.

On 9 Jun 15, the applicant was nonselected for promotion to Lieutenant Colonel by the Calendar Year 2015A (CY15A) Lieutenant Colonel Line of the Air Force Central Selection Board.

On 31 Jan 17, the applicant retired, was furnished an Honorable discharge, and credited with 20 years, 0 months, and 16 days active service.

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 there is no evidence of error or injustice.

The Defense Manpower Data Center records show the applicant applied for TEB on 16 Mar 16.  The application was rejected on 18 Apr 16 because the applicant could not secure the required four years retainability due to a mandatory Date of Separation assessed after he was passed over twice for promotion to Lieutenant Colonel.

Being twice passed over for promotion does not meet the intent for approval under Air Force Instruction 36-2649, Voluntary Education Program, Attachment 13, A13.18.1.1.2.  Based on his Total Active Federal Military Service Date, the applicant would have incurred a four year Active Duty Service Commitment.

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 6 Mar 17 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

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; however, 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.  The applicant did not apply to transfer educational benefits until after he was notified he was twice passed over for promotion, and was aware he could not secure the required retainability.  Other than his own assertions, he has presented no evidence of an error on the part of the Air Force or that he was treated differently than others similarly situated.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

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-2016-01119 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-2016-01119 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Mar 16.
	Exhibit B.  Excerpt from Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP3SA, dated 6 Jul 16.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 6 Mar 17, 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-2016-01119, and the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.