IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 November 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140004812 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request for approval to transfer his educational benefits under the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) provision of the Post-9/11 GI Bill to his dependents. 2. He states: a. based on the guidance of the Department of Defense (DOD) he believes he is eligible to transfer benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill to his dependents. b. the DOD regulations do not state that the individual has to be on active duty to take advantage of this benefit. It states that you just have to have served between the dates in the policy and fall under one of the categories, which he does. c. although the Board stated that there were various public campaigns generated to get the information to service members, many active duty service members were not aware of the benefit. d. being a Military Policeman, he worked in the field and had little access to a computer or information about new benefits. He doesn't recall any fliers or anything on the local news about the Post-9/11 GI Bill. It was not until months later after he retired when he saw and heard about the benefit. At that time, he was told it was too late. e. he admits that he didn't make any attempts to transfer the benefit because he didn't know about the benefit. If he had known about the benefit he would have definitely transferred the benefit before leaving the service. f. in addition, the Post-9/11 GI Bill was established on 22 June 2009. The policy went into effect on 1 August 2009 and he retired on 29 September 2009. This benefit was new to everyone and he doesn't feel the information was told to Soldiers. He also feels there should have been more effort made to Soldiers who were retiring from service, making sure that they fully understand this benefit, but it wasn't. For example, a form should have been presented doing out-processing stating you are aware of the new benefit and if you wish or do not wish to transfer the benefit. However, there was nothing to sign nor any information given to him during out-processing. g. he truly feels that he was not provided with this information because it was too new. In conclusion, he feels that because of his lack of knowledge about the Post-9/11 GI Bill the Board should reconsider his decision. 3. He provides no additional documents. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20120009014 on 28 February 2013. 2. On 29 October 1985, after prior service in the U.S. Marine Corps, the applicant enlisted in the Mississippi Army National Guard (MSARNG). He served in a variety of assignments in the MSARNG, through multiple periods of enlistment or extension, and attained the rank/grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6. 3. On 7 June 2004, he was mobilized and ordered to active duty in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. 4. On 29 September 2009, he was honorably released from active duty and returned to the control of the MSARNG. 5. Orders 098-826, issued by The Adjutant General's Office, MSARNG, dated 8 April 2010, honorably discharged him from the MSARNG and transferred him to the Retired Reserve (U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Retired)), effective 7 April 2010. 6. His record does not contain any documentation that indicates he transferred, or attempted to transfer, his education benefits under the TEB provision of the Post-9/11 GI Bill, prior to his date of transfer to the Retired Reserve. 7. On 22 June 2009, the DOD established the criteria for eligibility and transfer of unused educational benefits to eligible family members. The policy states an eligible individual is 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, is eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill and: a. 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 from the date of election; or b. has at least 10 years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) on the date of election, is precluded by either standard policy (service or DOD) or statute from committing to 4 additional years, and agrees to serve for the maximum amount of time allowed by such policy or statute; or c. is or becomes retirement eligible during the period 1 August 2009 through 1 August 2013. A service member is considered to be retirement eligible if he or she has completed 20 years of active duty or 20 qualifying years of Reserve service. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's statements in regard to his entitlement to TEB under the Post-9/11 GI Bill to his dependents are acknowledged. 2. Contrary to his statement, the applicant did not retire on 29 September 2009. The evidence of record shows he was fully eligible to transfer his educational benefits under the TEB prior to his transfer to the Retired Reserve on 7 April 2010, but did not do so. 3. Even though he contends he especially asked if he needed to transfer his educational benefits to his wife prior to his retirement, DOD, the VA, and the Army conducted a massive public campaign plan that generated major communications through military, public, and social media venues. The information was published well in advance with emphasis on the criteria. While there may have been some confusion during the early stages (the first 90 days) after the implementation, the applicant did not transfer to the Retired Reserve until almost a full year after the program was implemented. 4. Since the applicant did not transfer his benefits before being removed from an active status on 7 April 2010, he is ineligible to transfer benefits. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X____ ____X____ ____X____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20120009014, dated 28 February 2013. _______ _ __X_____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140004812 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140004812 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1