RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01648 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill educational benefits to his dependents. ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received a briefing conducted by the Elmendorf AFB Education office in the spring of 2009 explaining the new (at the time) Post 9/11 GI Bill. He asked specifically whether he was eligible to transfer the benefit to his family and was told that he was and to apply when he was ready to use it. At no time was he briefed, nor did he receive any instructions, that he must apply prior to his separation. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with his 31 Aug 09 retirement. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was relieved from active duty, on 31 Aug 09, with a reason for separation of Voluntary Retirement: Maximum Service or Time in Grade. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial, noting the applicant was given adequate information and failed to follow through with the requirement to transfer benefits while on active duty. Elmendorf AFB was given a mass briefing from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) on 7 May 09. The Base Education Office also had follow up briefings afterwards. The guidance for the education personnel was the use of the Directive Type Memo (DTM) which came out on 22 Jun 09. The applicant had ample time from his pre-separation briefing and the time of his retirement on 1 Sep 09 to sign up for the benefit to transfer to his dependents. His failure to act in a timely manner is not a basis for approval on the part of the Air Force. The Law specifically states: Subject to the time limitation for use of entitlement under Section 3321 an individual approved to transfer entitlement to educational assistance under this section may transfer such entitlement only while serving as a member of the armed forces when the transfer is executed. Members may have had the impression that being on active duty or in the Selected Reserve (SELRES) on the effective date of the law, 1 Aug 09, was sufficient to "vest" them with the right to transfer benefits at some time in the future. Had those members sought clarification from an educational counselor, read the DoD or Air Force guidance that was very clear on that point, or take other measures to make timely decisions before their separation or retirement, they could have initiated a timely transfer of benefits. The complete DPSIT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant indicates that, on 7 May 09, he attended the first (and only) mass briefing concerning the Post 9/11 GI Bill. An official from the DVA delivered the briefing. Throughout the briefing and during the question and answer phase she stated numerous times that "... all of the rules pertaining to the Post 9/11 GI Bill have not been worked out" and that "... further instructions will be forthcoming." After the briefing she made herself available for individual questions, at which time he specifically asked if he was eligible to transfer his benefit to his family members. He asked this because he already had an approved retirement date and was not able to meet the active duty service commitment due to high year of tenure (HYT). She reaffirmed what she stated during the briefing that those who were up against HYT would still be allowed to transfer the benefit to their family members without an additional service commitment. At that time nothing was said about having to apply for the transfer while still on active duty for individuals in his situation. He left the briefing with the understanding that he was good-to-go in terms of eligibility and transferability, and would get the benefit when it came time to use it. Two weeks after the briefing, on Friday, 21 May 09, he completed his final out-processing of the base and the Air Force. At no time during his pre-separation briefing or his final out-processing did anyone counsel him on the requirement to apply for transferability prior to his official retirement date of 1 Sep 09. On Monday, 24 May 09, he began 30 days of permissive TDY and subsequently began terminal leave on 23 Jun 09 until his official retirement date of 1 Sep 09. During this period, 24 May – 1 Sep 09, he did not receive any correspondences or additional information from the Air Force or the DVA concerning the Post 9/11 GI Bill. DPSIT alluded to the fact that no such efforts were made. His understanding that being on active duty on the effective date of the law, 1 Aug 09, was sufficient to "vest" him with the right to transfer benefits at some time in the future was a result of the briefing he received on 7 May 09 and his subsequent discussion of his situation with the representative from the VA. He did not seek further clarification because she assured him that he was eligible. Additionally, he was on Permissive TDY /Terminal Leave when the Base Education Office had follow up briefings using the Directive Type Memo that came out 22 Jun 09. Furthermore, the Air Force did not contact him after completing his pre-separation counseling and the subsequent start of his Permissive TDY /Terminal Leave. The fact that he should have applied for the transfer while still on active duty came as a total surprise. His plan, from the time he learned that he was eligible for the Post 9/11 GI Bill and that he could transfer it to his family, was to use it for his son. His son has applied and been accepted at a college in Iowa and their plan was to fund the majority of his education using his GI Bill. Denial of this benefit would place an unplanned financial burden on his family and had he been informed of the requirement to apply for the transfer while on active duty he would have. The complete applicant’s response, with attachments, 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. While we note the steps the Air Force office of primary responsibility indicates were taken to inform eligible personnel of this new benefit, it appears that through no fault of the applicant he was not properly counseled regarding the steps necessary to transfer his benefits to his dependents. We do not find it reasonable that he would have knowingly elected not to pursue use of this important entitlement. As such, in the interest of justice we find the evidence is sufficient to grant the requested relief. Therefore, we recommend the record be corrected as indicated below. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 31 August 2009, he elected to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill Educational Benefits. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-01648 in Executive Session on 8 January 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Apr 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 21 May 12. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Jun 12. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 27 Jun 12, w/atchs. Panel Chair