RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-04586
				COUNSEL:  NONE
				HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill Transfer of 
Educational Benefits (TEB) to his dependents effective 22 July 
2011.

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The original date he submitted his request was on 22 July 2011.  
He was not made aware that there were follow-up actions to his 
TEB submission until he received an email from the TEB office in 
July 2013.

In support of the applicant’s appeal, he provides a personal 
statement, email communique and other documentation.

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

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade 
of major.

Any member of the Armed Forces on or after 1 August 2009, who, 
at the time of the approval of the individual's request to 
transfer entitlement to educational assistance under this 
section, has at least six years of service in the Armed Forces 
(active duty and/or Selected Reserve) on the date of election 
and agrees to serve a specified additional period in the Armed 
Forces from the date of election, is eligible for the Post-9/11 
GI Bill.

________________________________________________________________
_






AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial.  DPSIT advises an email dated 
5 August 2011 was sent to the applicant stating his application 
for TEB had expired because he did not sign the SOU.  It also 
stated the required actions for the member to take in order to 
proceed.  The applicant states he listed both his personal and 
Air Force E-mail-4-Career (E4C) address in an effort to ensure 
delivery of correspondence.  The email notification from the 
TFSC is sent to the address listed on the Banner page of the 
vMPF which shows both applicant’s personal email and his E4C 
email address.

All of the evidence validates the applicant did not do the 
transfer of benefits as noted on applicants Submit Transfer 
Request form and Service Member History form.  Without a signed 
SOU, the Air Force has no way to determine if the member agrees 
to the four year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC).  

As of the date of this BCMR, the applicant has not re-applied 
for the TEB.

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

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 7 March 2014, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 
30 days (Exhibit C).  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.  The 
applicant’s contentions are duly noted; 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.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to 
the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application.

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 an error or an 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-2013-04586 in Executive Session on 1 July 2014, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:


The following documentary evidence was considered:

  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 September 2013, w/atchs.
  Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 26 November 2013, 
              w/atchs.
  Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 March 2014.