RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03966 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES (By amendment) APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational Benefits be reallocated between his two dependent sons. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Currently, all of his Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational Benefits are allocated to his older son, which was not at all his intent. Prior to his retirement, he believed he had allocated his educational benefits correctly. He allocated all of his available benefits to his oldest son, because the TEB acknowledgement screen led him to believe he could reallocate at a later date. None of his transitional briefings covered the quirks of the TEB application process, and he does not recall seeing any warning that he must allot at least one month to each eligible dependent. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 15 Nov 89. On 28 Feb 10, the applicant retired, and was credited with 20 years, 3 months, and 16 days of total active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. On 23 Sep 09, the applicant was approved for GI Bill TEB, and based upon his eligibility retirement date of 15 Nov 09, he incurred no additional active duty service commitment for this benefit. Since the inception of the TEB website, when a member submits a TEB request and does not allocate months of benefits to a dependent, a message pops up which states: "Warning: You have one or more eligible family members to whom you have not transferred months. If you do not transfer months to these individuals before you separate from the Armed Forces, you will not be able to do so afterwards. These family members will no longer be eligible for transferred educational assistance. Would you like to continue submitting your transfer request?" Two options are provided: a) OK (submits the request for approval in MilConnect) or b) Cancel (allows the member to make changes prior to submission). The member clicked the option to submit his request and was approved by Total Force Service Center personnel. When the member retired, his dependent children with zero months allocated became ineligible by regulation as he did not allocate at least 1 month of benefits. The member did not allocate months to all dependents and proceeded with the TEB application, despite the warning provided by the MilConnect website informing member that dependents allocated zero months of benefits would be ineligible. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In further support of his request, the applicant states he is a retired veteran who served and led for over 20 years of service, including two operations in combat zones. After returning from Afghanistan, he declined a Bronze Star nomination as he felt his actions did not merit such as others were more deserving. Upon retirement, he chose not to claim any medical disability even though he had sustained injuries while preparing for his deployment to Iraq. He did not want to bog down the system for this with more severe issues. Thus, he is deliberate about requesting benefits. Now as a Government Employee he continues to serve his Country ethically. When was transferring his educational benefits in 2009, he was in the midst of a lot of training prior to his deployment in Iraq, and it was the one year anniversary of the death of one of his sons. He believes if he had received the warning that one of his sons was not going to be eligible, he would have taken the proper actions. The son to whom he is trying to transfer his benefits is the last of his dependents who can use the benefits, and he was counting on those earned benefits to pay for the education. He cannot prove an error, but he knows he fully believed he filled out the application correctly at the time, and he earned the benefit the advisory is saying to now deny him. A computer glitch from 2009 should not deny him his benefits (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, to include his rebuttal response to the advisory opinion, we believe the applicant is the victim of an error or injustice. While the Board notes the comments of AFPC/DPSIT indicating relief should be denied because the applicant’s record does not reflect his youngest dependent son as designated to receive his Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits, the program was new at the time of application in 2009 and there was a lot of confusion about the requirements and procedures for properly distributing educational benefits among dependents. The applicant clearly earned these educational benefits, and we are convinced he fully intended to enroll each of his dependents in the program as eligible recipients of said benefits, and that he believed he achieved his intent at the time. Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 23 September 2009 he elected to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational Benefits to his sons. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03966 in Executive Session on 14 Jul 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03966 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Sep 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 20 Oct 14. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Nov 14. Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 8 Dec 14.