RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2022-01308

XXXX X. XXXX	COUNSEL: NONE
	
	HEARING REQUESTED: YES

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

His application submitted on 21 Apr 22 [sic] for his Post-9/11 GI Bill Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) be approved with an Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) of two years instead of four years.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

DoDI 1341.13, Post-9/11 GI Bill, Enclosure 3 states, eligibility and administration of the Post-9/11 GI Bill are the responsibility of the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).  However, DAFI 36-2670, Total Force Development, para 6.11.15.8.1.1. states, AF/A1DL is the Regular Air Force TEB site security manager with execution responsibility maintained by Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC).  The Post 9/11 GI Bill regulation is ever changing with new or revoking requirements within each change.  The TEB is labeled as a retention tool however, the verbiage is a benefit.  The benefit is afforded to other service members with 16 years of military service resulting in the completion of 20 years.  He is equally retained in the same manner as the 16 year member electing to transfer their benefit, but he is not equally afforded the same benefit.  He has an honorable service history and requiring the ADSC of four years in this situation is not equal with other service members that have served less time.  It is unjust and will penalize him, because he made Service Before Self a priority and therefore choosing later in his career to have dependents.  He already has a 20 year service commitment with a current Expiration Term of Service (ETS) of 14 Sep 23 and a projected ETS of 1 Oct 24.  

He did not elect to transfer benefits prior since his spouse had secondary education and he has no child dependents.  The Department of Air Force policy has changed to allow TEB for service members with 16 or more years in service.  On 4 May 22, via Air Force myPers (Reference# XXXX-XXXX), he submitted an ADSC Exception to Policy (ETP).  The response he received was to request resolution through the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a currently serving Air Force master sergeant (E-7).

On 20 Apr 22, according to the Benefits of Education Administration Service Tool (BEAST), provided by AFPC/DP3SA, the applicant initially applied for TEB.

On 23 May 22, according to the BEAST, provided by AFPC/DP3SA, the TEB application was rejected because the applicant did not secure the required retainability.

The Automated Records Management System (ARMS) does not contain AF Form 4406, Post-9/11 GI Bill Transfer of Educational Benefits Statement of Understanding.

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 on the documentation provided by the applicant and analysis of the facts, there is no evidence of an error or injustice on the part of the Air Force.  Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) records show the applicant applied for TEB on 20 Apr 22.  The application was rejected on 23 May 22, because he failed to secure the required retainability within the application window.  In accordance with (IAW) 38 U.S.C. Chapter 33 - Post-9/11 Educational Assistance, §3319(b)(1), DoDI 1341.13, Post-9/11 GI Bill, Enclosure 3 (3.a.) and DAFI 36-2670, Total Force Development (6.11.15.1.1.1.), members may request a transfer of benefits if service in the Armed Forces is at least 6 years and the member enters an agreement to serve at least four more years from the date of request.  IAW the applicant’s High Year of Tenure (HYT) date (23 Sep 27) he may enter an agreement to serve four years so long as his application date is on or before 23 Sep 23.  It is strictly a service members decision if and when to apply for TEB.  Service members waiting until later than 16 years in the Armed Forces to request TEB have made a conscious decision to wait.  

The Post-9/11 GI Bill is an entitlement for service members with time in the Armed Forces that meets eligibility criteria; however, the ability to transfer such entitlement was included in statute for the strict purpose of promoting recruitment and retention in the Armed Forces.  The TEB site security manager simply manages access to the TEB web portal housed on the DMDC platform which tracks TEB applications.  Based on the applicant’s HYT, he is eligible to secure TEB approval.  In the case of the applicant, there is no current law, statute, DoD or Air Force policy that will allow curtailment of the required four-year service obligation.

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 Jun 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 not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP3SA and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

4.  The applicant has not shown a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

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-2022-01308 in Executive Session on 12 Jul 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, w/atchs, dated 6 May 22.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory Opinion, AFPC/DP3SA, w/atchs, dated 25 May 22.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to Applicant, dated 7 Jun 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.