RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 


IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01462 

COUNSEL: NO 

HEARING DESIRED: NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to hisdependents. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

Although he elected to retire prior to the effective date totransfer education benefits to his dependents under Post 9/11 GIBill he would like the opportunity to transfer his remainingbenefits to his son. 

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

On 3 Sep 08, the applicant submitted an application for 
retirement, and was retired effective 1 Apr 09. 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application arecontained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of theAir Force, which is attached at Exhibit B. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial indicating there is no evidence ofan error or injustice. The applicant has not provided anyevidence of an error or injustice by the Air Force. The 
applicant retired prior to the 1 Aug 09 effective date of thePost 9/11 TEB. The applicant stated in his retirement 
application that he elected to retire to provide care for hiselderly mother. Additionally, the Air Force only afforded theopportunity to extend 30 days to service members with a 
retirement date of 31 Jul 09. 


Under Title 38 United States Code (USC), Chapter 33, servicemembers are allowed to transfer unused educational benefits to 
their dependent spouses and children. Any member of the ArmedForces, active duty or Selected Reserves, officer, or enlisted,
on or after 1 Aug 09, who is eligible for the Post-9/11 GI bill,
has at least six years of service in the Armed Forces on the dateof election, and agrees to serve a specified additional period ofin the Armed Forces from the date of election, may transferunused Post-9/11 benefits to their dependents. The Air Force, inimplementing its guidance, developed a communication plan thatused the Air Force Personnel Center Commander and the Education 
and Training Sections at each installation to serve as 
spokespersons to communicate the Post-9/11 GI Bill transfer-todependent 
program using internal media, internal communicationtools, and external trade publications. There were various news 
articles about the Post-9/11 GI Bill; most noted the requirementto be on duty on the 1 Aug 09 effective date of the Post-9/11 GI 
Bill to be eligible to transfer benefits. 

The complete AFPC/DPSIT evaluation, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit B. 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

He was unable to properly make a retirement decision due to howthe program was announced and then implemented. His decision 
would have been different if the Air Force had provided thetypical time frame between announcement and implementation ofsuch a significant program. He was not able to make an informed 
retirement decision based on all the facts in the same fiscal 
year. If he had known at the beginning of the fiscal year whatthe program was offering he would have retired in the timeframeto allow him to transfer education benefits to his son. He 
believes the information on programs such as this should havebeen announced at the beginning of the fiscal year to providethose in situations such as his adequate time to make an informeddecision; or the program should have a grandfather clause forthose in situations such as his. He is requesting to transferthe five remaining months of education benefits to his son. 

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D. 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existinglaw or regulations. 
2. The application was timely filed. 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice 
of the applicant’s complete submission, to include his rebuttalresponse, in judging the merits of the case; however, we are notpersuaded the applicant has been the victim of an error orinjustice. We note the applicant retired effective 1 Apr 09,
well before the 1 Aug 09 effective date established by law fortransfer of Post-9/11 GI Bill Education Benefits to dependents.
Therefore, he is precluded by law from being eligible to 
participate in the Post-9/11 GI Bill program. While the 
applicant’s contentions are duly noted, we do not find theevidence sufficient to conclude the applicant was precluded fromplanning his retirement due to an error on the part of the AirForce or that he has been treated differently than otherssimilarly situated. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to thecontrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the reliefsought in this application. 
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and theapplication will only be reconsidered upon the submission ofnewly discovered relevant evidence not considered with thisapplication. 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR DocketNumber BC-2012-01462 in Executive Session on 31 Jan 13, under theprovisions of AFI 36-2603: 

Panel Chair 
Member 
Member 


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR DocketNumber BC-2012-01462 was considered: 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Apr 12. 

Exhibit B. Applicant’s Military Personnel Records. 

Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 10 May 12, w/atch. 

Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 May 12. 

 Panel Chair