RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01506 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His active duty service commitment (ADSC) incurred as a result of his transfer of education benefits (TEB) be revoked. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He revoked the TEB benefit but the Air Force refused to remove the ADSC. When transferring benefits, he signed a statement of understanding (SOU) that states “I understand I may transfer up to 36 months of my educational benefits to my spouse or children or in combination; and I understand I may modify or revoke my election at any time.” No where does it state that the ADSC will remain even if benefits are revoked before ever being used. There is no AF or Department of Defense (DoD) policy or regulation that requires the member to serve out the commitment after benefits are revoked. Absolutely no benefits were used prior to revocation so he has not cost the AF, DoD, or tax payers any money at all. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his Post 9/11 GI Bill TEB SOU. The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the Regular Air Force in the grade of captain. On 7 Jan 10, the applicant signed a Post 9/11 GI Bill Transfer of Educational Benefits Statement of Understanding, whereby he acknowledged and agreed to a service obligation associated with the TEB. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial. DPSIT states, the applicant signed the SOU and his TEB benefits were approved on 7 Jan 10. On the SOU under Section I, SERVICE OBLIGATION, it clearly states that the member will incur a service obligation period of four years and the ADSC will be updated in the member’s record effective from the date of application in the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) TEB website. Exceptions applicable to members eligible for retirement are also listed. DPSIT states, based on information reported in Right Now Technology (RNT) by Total Force Service Center (TFSC) personnel, the applicant was provided with instructions/requirements that he needed to accomplish prior to his TEB application being approved. More specifically, the requirement to sign a SOU agreeing to the obligated service required to participate in the transfer of benefits option under the Post 9/11 GI Bill. When a member applies for TEB on the DMDS website the first thing that appears is the Submit Transfer Request, under the members personal information is a Message from Your Service Component which states: “Please note the following: (1) Do not transfer benefits unless you are willing to complete the service obligation. While you may revoke your transfer at any time, a revocation DOES NOT automatically cancel the associated Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC), EVEN IF BENEFITS HAVE NOT BEEN USED. (2) AFPC WILL NOT prorate ADSCs for members who have used any part of their VA educational benefits.” The complete DPSIT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The recommendation to deny his application is based on a flawed reading of the facts. It is based on a single line on the SOU he signed which reads “While you may revoke your transfer at any time, a revocation does not automatically cancel the associated ADSC, even if benefits have not been used.” The advisory writer chose to focus on the words “does not,” but ignored the important qualifier of “automatically.” The addition of the word “automatically” explicitly implies that consideration for removal of the associated ADSC should be given if the member makes an effort to have it removed. In the absence of a dedicated procedure for removing the ADSC this process is that effort. It would be an injustice to force him to serve this ADSC when the SOU specifically states that he may revoke his election at any time and his family and he used absolutely no benefits. Since no benefits were used and the Air Force expended no resources during this process the associated ADSC should be removed. The applicant's complete response is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ 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 error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission to include his rebuttal statement, in judging the merits of the case; however, 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 that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant’s interpretation of the statement of understanding (SOU) is noted; however, in our view, the SOU put the applicant on notice that he would possibly have to serve the ADSC even if he had not used any of the benefits. The applicant has not provided evidence of due diligence on his part to obtain clarification of the ADSC requirement if he chose to revoke the transfer of benefits. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 Docket Number BC-2012-01506 in Executive Session on 13 Sep 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2012-01506 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Apr 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 10 May 12. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 May 12. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 25 Jun 12. Panel Chair