RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02705 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to accomplish a Post-9/11 GI Bill transfer of educational benefits (TEB) to his dependents. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In February 2010, he submitted a request to retire. In that same weekend, he met with the base education office to inform them of his plan to retire in 2010 and to discuss the process of transferring his Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependent. The education office point of contact informed him that he was not eligible to transfer Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits unless he committed to reenlisting for four additional years of service. He was not willing to re-enlist for four more years, so he retired in July 2010. In May 2014, he was discussing Post-9/11 GI Bill transferability with an Air Force (AF) member who had recently retired and transferred benefits to his dependent. He explained his situation to him and was informed that if he was retirement eligible on August 2009, he should not have been required to re-enlist for four years. This AF member provided him with a copy of Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 09-003: Post-9/11 GI Bill, dated 22 June 2009, from the “Office of the Under Secretary Of Defense.” Page 14 of the DTM discusses eligibility requirements for members eligible for retirement. Paragraph (3) (A) clearly states; “For those individuals eligible for retirement on August 1, 2009, no additional service is required. He received his 20-year letter and was deemed eligible for retirement in October 2008. Based on this requirement he should have been eligible to transfer benefits in July 2010 prior to his retirement date. In the last few years, his family has experienced a number of hardships with the most trying one being a house fire in 2009. On May 11, 2009, their house caught on fire while his family was asleep. They were very fortunate, as they were all able to get out of the house unharmed. Due to water and fire damage, over 80% of their house was destroyed. Due to an error and discrepancy by the insurance company, their home was only insured for up to $40,000 in damages. The total damages were over $80,000. He used their life savings, 401k and money put away for his children’s education to cover some of the costs. The financial burden was tremendous. Now five years later they are still recovering from this life changing experience and are living from paycheck to paycheck. Because of these unfortunate circumstances and financial struggles, he hopes he can acquire some additional funding for his son’s education. The financial burden of education costs is going to be a very big hurdle for his family to overcome. The approval to use Post-9/11 Transfer of Educational benefits could help significantly in their time of need. He has served his country for over 20 years and been deployed a number of times. He believes he has met the necessary requirements to transfer benefits to his dependent. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to copies of documents extracted from the Automated Records Management System (ARMS), the applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 26 October 1987, and subsequently entered the Air National Guard on 16 October 1991. Per Reserve Order EK-2430, dated 2 March 2010, the applicant was relieved from his, then, current assignment and assigned to the Retired Reserve section on 31 July 2010, awaiting pay at age 60 (15 March 2030). The applicant served on active duty since 11 Sep 01, for an aggregate period of over 90 days; therefore, upon his date of assignment to the Retired Reserve Section, he was entitled to benefits under the Post 9/11 GI Bill program in his own right. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is included at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1Y recommends denial. A1Y states that the applicant did not designate his dependents to receive TEB benefits prior to his retirement as defined in Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 09-003, and there is no evidence to reflect that he received improper guidance on the Post-9/11 GI Bill or instructions to transfer his benefit prior to his retirement. The complete NGB/A1Y evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In further support of his request, the applicant refutes the NGB/A1Y recommendation for disapproval because there is no documentation that he received improper guidance and states that he should not be penalized based on the retention office not having the documentation. He emphasizes that the lack of documentation of military record should not be the reason for his disqualification as this is not his fault. He should not be penalized for their inability to keep records. If he were informed that he was eligible, he would have applied for TEB and would have no reason not to do so. If it were known he was eligible and did not apply for TEB prior to his retirement, he would fully accept the disapproval for TEB. However, in his case, he was misinformed and told he was not eligible, when he really was. He expresses that he has the qualifying service to be eligible for Post-9/11 TEB but is being denied based on incorrect information from his retention office manager (ROM) The applicant further states that all of the military documents he has read start off by stating “Eligible Individuals: “Has at least 6 years of service in the Armed Forces on the date of election and agrees to serve 4 additional years in the Armed Forces,” however, farther down the page there are exceptions to the 4-year requirement. He really believes that at his base one may not have read down the directive far enough and could have missed the retirement eligibility exceptions portion of the directive. He believes there was not much clarity of Post-9/11 GI Bill TEB eligibility during the 2009 to the 2010 period at his base. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. 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 an injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, we are persuaded the applicant is the victim of an error. While we note the comments of NGB/A1Y indicating that relief should be denied because the applicant’s records contain no documentation substantiating his contention that _he was erroneously informed that he was not eligible to transfer Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits unless he committed to reenlisting for four additional years of service, we believe a preponderance of the evidence substantiates that corrective action is warranted. In this respect, we note the applicant has provided a copy of his Notification of Eligibility for Reserve Retired Pay at Age 60, indicating that as of 15 October 2008, he completed the required years of service under the provisions of Title 10, U.S.C., Section 12731. Thus, according to the Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 09-003: Post-9/11 GI Bill, dated 22 June 2009, the applicant met the eligibility requirement for Post-9/11 GI Bill transfer of educational benefits (TEB) to his dependent on 1 August 2009, without having to incur an active duty service commitment. Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below. 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 RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 1 June 2010, he elected to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational Benefits to his dependents. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02705 in Executive Session on 11 May 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02705 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 July 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, NGB/A1Y, dated 27 Aug 2014. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Nov 2014. Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 14 Nov 2014, w/atchs.