RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-01882
		COUNSEL:  NONE
	XXXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The application he completed for the Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) on 8 Dec 2010 be accepted.
________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

A Total Force Service Center (TFSC) audit discovered a Statement of Understanding (SOU) error 2-years after he submitted his 
request for TEB.  The administrative error did not alter the parameters within or the commitment of the contract he  originally 
entered into.  Therefore, his Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) for TEB should begin on 8 Dec 2010.

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of a TEB Discussion Thread.

His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 28 Feb 2013, the applicant signed the Post-9/11 GI Bill Transfer Of Educational Benefits Statement Of Understanding.
________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial.  DPSIT states that on 7 Dec 2010, the applicant submitted an application for the Post-9/11 GI Bill 
through the “Milconnect” website.  On 8 Dec 2010, he was sent an email requesting he sign his SOU.  On 22 Dec 2010, he was sent 
another email stating his application had expired because he did not sign the SOU.  Had the applicant contacted the TFSC, he would 
have received guidance to return to the virtual Military Personnel 
Flight to sign the SOU.  Right Now Technology notes reflect he 
never made the attempt to follow through with signing the SOU.  
Without singing the SOU there is no way the TFSC knew the 
applicant wanted to obligate 4-years required for TEB.  The 
applicant has recently re-applied for the TEB and on 28 Feb 
2013 he was approved.  DPSIT finds there has been no injustice to 
the extent that the applicant did not receive adequate counseling 
as required by law and DoD regulations.

The complete DPSIT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 19 May 2013, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded 
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  As of 
this date, no response has been received by this office (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 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 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 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 AFBCMR BC-2013-01882 in Executive Session on 16 Dec 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member

All members voted to correct the record as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Apr 2013, w/atch.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 1 May 2013, w/atchs.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 May 2013.
2 3