ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 February 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170016163 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * transfer of education benefits (TEB) from his Post-9/11 GI Bill * personal appearance before the Board APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Orders 15-138-00026 (Reassignment to Retired Reserves), dated May 18, 2015 * Orders C07-596179, dated July 20, 2015 * Letter from Department of Defense, dated July 18, 2016 * Letter to Congressman, dated October 18, 2016 * Letter to Senator, dated December 6, 2016 * Letter from Senator, dated December 16, 2016 * Letter from Senator, dated December 19, 2016 * Letter to Congressman, dated February 13, 2017 * Letter to President, dated June 13, 2017 FACTS: 1. The applicant states in effect that the United States Army Reserve (USAR) stated he did not fulfill his obligation by retiring early, thus causing his son’s Post 9/11 GI Bill TEB to terminate. He retired at 58 years of age using deployment credit to retire early. He asked his unit administrator if retiring before the age of 60 would affect his son’s GI Bill that was transferred to him. The unit administrator stated the only thing that would be affected is that he would not receive his TRICARE insurance coverage until age 60. 2. A review of the applicant’s service record shows: a. 20 March 1981 – date of enlistment into the Michigan Army National Guard b. 20 June 1982 – NGB Form 22 – transferred him to the USAR Control Group c. 29 May 1998 – Orders 102-6, discharged him from the Army National Guard d. 27 May 2015 – he faxed a statement to AHRC reference his retirement packet e. 17 June 2015– he was honorably released from the Army Reserve and transferred to the Retired Reserve on Orders 15-138-00026 - he completed 28 years, 1 month, and 8 days in the Reserve component service. f. 2 October 2016 - The St. Louis VA Regional Office sent an email to U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Education Incentives, concerning the applicant’s Post 9/11 GI Bill transfer and the associated service obligation. When he elected to transfer the Post 9/11 GI Bill to his eligible dependents, he was assigned a service obligation of 30 November 2016; however, he transferred to the Retired Reserve 17 June 2015, which was prior to fulfilling that entire obligation. Since he did not fulfill the service obligation, his Post 9/11 GI Bill transfer request has been rejected. His dependents are not eligible to use Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits and may be subject to recoupment by the Department of Veterans Affairs if benefits have already been paid. The Post 9/11 GI Bill is still the applicant’s to use; however, his dependents are not eligible to use benefits since the service obligation was not fulfilled. 3. On 5 April 2017, the applicant received a letter from AHRC, concerning his letter to the President and it explained the following: a. TEB is an incentive requiring service calculated from the TEB request date b. It is the responsibility of the Service Member (SM) to know their TEB service Obligation c. All transfer benefits must be transferred before the SM separates or retires – Public Law makes no provision for waiving this requirement d. His request to transfer the Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents was made on 2 May 2014 and it was approved on 5 May 2014 with a TEB Obligation End Date (OED) of 30 November 2016 e. Before the TEB website permits a SM to submit a TEB request, he/she must click and agree to nine statements, two important statements were: * SM understands and agrees to remain in the Armed Forces for the period required and failure to complete the service may lead to an overpayment * SM understands he/she is responsible for any overpayment is due 4. The applicant provides: a. Orders 15-138-00026 (Reassignment to Retired Reserves), dated 18 May 2015, shows his reassignment to the Retired Reserves after completion of 20 or more years of qualifying service for retired pay at age 60. b. AHRC-PDP-TR Orders C07-596179, dated 20 July 2015, reflects he was placed on the retired list by the Army Human Resources Command (AHRC). c. Letter from Department of Defense, dated July 18, 2016, congratulating the applicant on his Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to members of his immediate family. It indicated the transfer date request, approval date and obligation end date: * Transfer Request Date: 2 May 2014 * Transfer Status: Request Approved . * Transfer Status Date: 6 May 2014 * Obligation End Date: 30 November 2016 d. Letter to Congressman, dated 18 October 2016, which states 1) He received notification recently that all benefits to include tuition, Basic Allowance for Housing, and the one-time stipend for books, fees, and supplies would cease. Not only were the benefits ceasing, he was notified that he will have to pay back to the Veteran's Administration approximately fifteen thousand dollars that his son has already received for educational use. It would be an impossible financial burden to keep his son in school at Michigan State University. 2) The reason given by the VA that his son would no longer receive funds is that he did not fulfill his remaining obligation. His retirement date would have been 19 November 2016. Any deployments under the Iraqi/Enduring Freedom Operation after 2008 can be applied against the age 60 requirement to retire, thus he was able to retire early at age 58. He was advised by the United States Army Reserve that he could retire under the deployment offer, and it would not affect the Post 9/11 GI Bill transfer of entitlements to his son. That information, however, was erroneous information. Had he known he was required to continue his service until the age of 60 to transfer his educational benefits to his son, he certainly would have. e. Letter to the Senator from the Department of Veterans Affairs, dated 6 December 2016 which states: 1) the applicant was required to spend an additional 31 months until 30 November 2016 to be eligible for the transfer benefits, and since he did not complete his required service obligation, he is assessed a debt for the entire amount paid in benefits, totaling $15,037.60. 2) Department of Defense also provided him with a TEB confirmation, where he acknowledged: * he understood and agreed to remain in the Armed Forces for the period required. * a failure to complete this service may lead to an overpayment by the Department of Veterans Affairs for any payments made * he understood he would be responsible for any overpayments due to not completing his additional obligated service e. Letter to the applicant from the Senator, dated December 16, 2016, indicating they received a response from the Department of Veterans Affairs on his issue f. Letter to the applicant from the Senator, dated December 19, 2016, indicating he is looking into the matter. g. Letter to Congressman, dated February 13, 2017, requesting assistance with his current situation. He forwarded copies of correspondence from his state senators, congressman and his letter on his current situation. He highlighted a couple of statements in the response from the Veterans Administration that appears to “point the finger” at the United State Army Reserve and the Department of Defense stating that if they reinstate his status as completing his obligation, the Veterans Administration would reissue the funds to his son. He believes this is the best avenue to approach this matter. h. Letter to the President, dated June 13, 2017, requesting assistance with his TEB. He even considered enlisting again for two years to fulfill his obligation, but was told he could not reenlist because of age. He is hopeful that the Department of Defense, United States Army Reserve Command and the Veterans Administration would reconsider their decision after an inquiry from the Office of the President into this matter. 5. Public Law 110-252 limits the eligibility to transfer unused benefits to those members of the Armed Forces who are serving on active duty or a member of the Selected Reserve. A Soldier must also agree to serve the prescribed additional service obligation. 6. On 10 July 2009, the Army released the Post-9/11 GI Bill Implementation Policy that identified and established responsibilities, eligibility criteria, benefits, and detailed guidance on the administration of the program. The policy states, in part Soldiers whose request to transfer benefits is approved will incur an additional service obligation in accordance with the below policy. a. Eligibility. (1) Any Soldier of the Armed Forces who fulfills Post 9/11 GI Bill eligibility requirements and who, at the time of the approval of the Soldier’s request to transfer entitlement to educational assistance does not have an adverse action flag, is eligible for the Post 9/11 GI Bill, and (2) Has at least 6 years of service in the Armed Forces on the date of election and agrees to serve 4 additional years from the date of request, regardless of the number of months transferred, or (3) Has at least 10 years of service in the Armed Forces on the date of election and cannot commit to 4 additional years due to an Retention Control Point (RCP) or Mandatory Retirement Date (MRD) must commit to serve for the maximum amount of time allowed by either RCP or MRD as of the date of request, regardless of the number of months transferred, 7. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) states an applicant is not entitled to a hearing before the ABCMR. Hearings may be authorized by a panel of the ABCMR or by the Director of the ABCMR. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents and evidence in the records. The Board considered the applicant’s statement, his record of service, the requested transfer of his education benefits, documents showing his service obligation associated with the transfer and the date and reason for his separation. The Board considered the public law related to transfer of education benefits. The Board found insufficient evidence to show the applicant was not fully informed of his obligated service or that the obligated service required prior separation was in error. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the denial of the applicant’s transfer of education benefits was not in error or unjust. 2. The applicant's request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered. In this case, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision. As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case. 3. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : 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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 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. REFERENCE: 1. Public Law 110-252 limits the eligibility to transfer unused benefits to those members of the Armed Forces who are serving on active duty or a member of the Selected Reserve. A Soldier must also agree to serve the prescribed additional service obligation. 2. On 10 July 2009, the Army released the Post-9/11 GI Bill Implementation Policy that identified and established responsibilities, eligibility criteria, benefits, and detailed guidance on the administration of the program. The policy states, in part Soldiers whose request to transfer benefits is approved will incur an additional service obligation in accordance with the below policy. a. Eligibility. (1) Any Soldier of the Armed Forces who fulfills Post 9/11 GI Bill eligibility requirements and who, at the time of the approval of the Soldier’s request to transfer entitlement to educational assistance does not have an adverse action flag, is eligible for the Post 9/11 GI Bill, and (2) Has at least 6 years of service in the Armed Forces on the date of election and agrees to serve 4 additional years from the date of request, regardless of the number of months transferred, or (3) Has at least 10 years of service in the Armed Forces on the date of election and cannot commit to 4 additional years due to an Retention Control Point (RCP) or Mandatory Retirement Date (MRD) must commit to serve for the maximum amount of time allowed by either RCP or MRD as of the date of request, regardless of the number of months transferred, 3. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) states an applicant is not entitled to a hearing before the ABCMR. Hearings may be authorized by a panel of the ABCMR or by the Director of the ABCMR. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20170016163 7 1