RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2022-00813

xxxxxxxxx	COUNSEL:xxxxx
	
	HEARING REQUESTED: NO	

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

His 2016 Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits (TEB) application be approved.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

He applied for TEB in 2016, which was denied because he did not have the required retainability.  He reenlisted in order to meet the retainability requirement and to his knowledge the TEB was complete.  On 23 Feb, he logged into the educational site to use the GI Bill for his daughter and saw that the months (allotted) for each dependent was blank.  He called the Help Desk and found out that his 2016 TEB application was not approved because he had failed to sign the statement of understanding (SOU).  He was unaware of this required additional step, submitting a SOU, and until recently he had no reason to log into the educational benefits site.  Granting his request would allow his daughter to use the educational benefits that he would like to give her and prevent financial hardship.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is an Air Force senior master sergeant (E-8). 

On 12 Jan 16, as noted in the documents provided by AFPC/DP3SA, the applicant was sent a message from the Total Force Service Center (TFSC) that his application for TEB had been received. The message further indicates that in order to be approved, he must submit a SOU, and commit to four additional years of service from the date of application.

On 21 Jan 16, as noted in the documents provided by AFPC/DP3SA, the TEB application was rejected because he did not secure the required retainability or complete the SOU.

On 18 Feb 16, the applicant signed AF Form 901, Reenlistment Eligibility Annex to DD Form 4, and checked “Yes” in Block D, “The reason for this reenlistment is to qualify for transferability of the Post 9/11 GI Bill.” 

On 26 Feb 16, according to DD Form 4, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document – Armed Forces of the United States, he reenlisted for a period of four years and 22 months.

On 27 Feb 17, as noted in the documents provided by AFPC/DP3SA, the applicant was sent a message from the TFSC that his application for TEB had been received. The message further indicates that in order to be approved, he must submit a SOU, and commit to four additional years of service from the date of application.

On 29 Mar 17, as noted in the documents provided by AFPC/DP3SA, the TEB application was rejected because he did not secure the required retainability or complete the SOU.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFPC/DP3SA recommends denying the application. Based upon analysis of the facts and documentation provided by the applicant, there is no evidence of an error or injustice.  The applicant applied for TEB on 12 May 11, and his application was rejected on 27 May 11, due to his failure to secure the required retainability within the 30 day TEB application window.  He reapplied on 11 Jan 16 and the application was rejected on 11 Feb 16, for his failure to secure the required retainability within the 30 day TEB application window.  He reapplied on 24 Feb 17, and the application was rejected as he failed to complete and submit the required TEB Statement of Understanding (SOU) within the 30 day TEB application window.   The applicant did not secure the required retainability and/or did not complete and submit the required TEB SOU within the TEB application window.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 7 Apr 22 for comment (Exhibit  D), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is the victim of an error or injustice.  While the Board notes the recommendation of AFPC/DP3SA against correcting the record, the Board finds a preponderance of the evidence substantiates the applicant’s contentions.  In this regard, the applicant applied to transfer his education benefits on 11 Jan 16 and reenlisted for the purpose of the TEB on 26 Feb 16, thus obtaining the four-year military service obligation required for transfer.  Thereafter, he served four years on active duty, completed his obligation for transfer, and fulfilled his service commitment to the Air Force.  As such, despite the applicant’s failure to sign the SOU, the Board finds the applicant met the intent of the program and his failure to sign the SOU should be regarded as a procedural defect only and not as evidence of an intent to abandon the transfer request.  Therefore, the Board recommends correcting the applicant’s records as indicated below.

RECOMMENDATION

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 26 Feb 16, he elected and was approved to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational Benefits to his eligible dependents with an obligation end date of 25 Feb 20.
CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2022-00813 in Executive Session on 14 Jun 22 and 11 Oct 22:

, Panel Chair 
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, dated 24 Feb 22.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory Opinion, AFPC/DP3SA, w/atchs, dated 27 Mar 22.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to Applicant, dated 7 Apr 22.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.