RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2016-01960

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Selected Reserve Service Commitment date be changed from 1 Nov 19 to 14 Aug 17, as it pertains to Post-9/11 GI Bill Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She transferred her Post-9/11 Educational Benefits to her son on 13 May 10 and began her four-year service commitment.  She unintentionally interrupted her service on 16 Dec 11 by transferring to the Participating Inactive Ready Reserve (PIRR) due to the closing of the Airborne Laser Program office where she served.  She re-entered the Ready Reserve on 15 Aug 13 and her service commitment should have re-started on that date.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 Jun 94, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force.

On 15 Apr 05, the applicant was furnished an Honorable discharge and credited with 10 years, 10 months, and 15 days active service.

On 16 Apr 05, the applicant transferred to the Air Force Reserve.

On 8 Mar 11, the applicant signed a Post-9/11 Transfer of Educational Benefits Statement of Understanding establishing a Selected Reserve Service Commitment of four years.

On 16 Dec 11, the applicant transferred to the Participating Inactive Ready Reserve (PIRR).

On 15 Aug 13, the applicant re-entered the Ready Reserve.

On 11 May 16, the applicant signed a Post-9/11 Transfer of Educational Benefits Statement of Understanding establishing a Selected Reserve Service Commitment date of 1 Nov 19.

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.

The applicant’s initial request to transfer Post-9/11 benefits on 15 May 10, was rejected when she did not return the Statement of Understanding (SOU).  On 8 Mar 11, after receiving additional counseling, the applicant submitted the signed SOU, establishing a service commitment date of 13 May 14.  The request to transfer was then terminated on 21 May 13 due to the applicant’s move to the PIRR.  The applicant re-applied for TEB on 2 Nov 15, with a new SOU, establishing a new service commitment date of 1 Nov 19.

The required active duty or Selected Reserve Service Commitment is spelled out in three places on the SOU, which the applicant signed twice.  The Directive Type Memorandum (DTM) 09-003 and the Department of Defense Instruction 1341.13, Post-9/11 GI Bill.  Both define these terms as “…individuals serving on active duty or in the Selected Reserve.”  It does not include the Ready Reserve. 

Further, the SOU clearly states failure to complete the service commitment will result in forfeiture of the opportunity to transfer benefits.

Finally, the applicant is not approaching a mandatory date of separation and is able to fulfill the total service commitment.

A complete copy of the ARPC/DPTT 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.  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-2016-01960 in Executive Session on 27 Jul 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-01960 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 May 16, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Excerpt from Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, ARPC/DPTT, dated 23 Aug 16, w/atchs.
	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-2016-01960, and the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.