DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No.1517-16 
OCT 17 2016 
From: Chairman, Board for Correction ofNaval Records 
To: Secretary of the Navy 

Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO 

Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552 
Encl: (1)DD Form 149 w/attachments 
(2) NAVADMIN 187/09 of26 Jun 09 
(3) NAV ADMIN 203/09 of 11 Jul 09 
(4)NPCmemo 1780 PERS-314dtd 1O May 16 
(5) Certificate ofRelease or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) 
effective 30 Jun 13 

1. Pursuant to the provisions ofreference (a) Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed 
enclosure (1)with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected 
to establish eligibility to transfer Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents. 

2. The Board, consisting of         , reviewed Petitioner's 
allegations of error and injustice on 11 August 2016 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined 
that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence ofrecord. 
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofthe enclosures, naval records, and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of 
error and injustice, finds as follows: 

a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available 
under existing law and regulations within the Department ofthe Navy. 

b. The Post-9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Act (Post 9/11 GI Bill, 
Public Law 110-252) was signed into law on 30 June 2008 and became effective on 
1 August 2009. The bill provides financial support for education and housing for service 
members with at least 90 days of service on or after 11 September 2001. The act also includes a 
provision for qualifying service members to transfer educational benefits to dependents. General 
descriptions ofthe essential components of the new law were widely available beginning in 
summer 2008 but specific implementing guidance was not published until summer 2009. 

c. The Navy's guidance implementing the Post-9/11 GI Bill was published by NAVADMIN 
187/09, released on 26 June 2009, and NAVADMIN 203/09, released 11July2009. Under the 
guidance, "active duty sailors that separate, retire, transfer to the Fleet Reserve or who are 
discharged prior to 1 August 2009 are not eligible to elect transferability." See enclosures (2) 
and (3). 

d. Petitioner's application claims that he attempted to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill education 
benefits (TEB) to his dependents in MilConnect on 15 December 2009. However, the Petitioner 
did not have sufficient remaining time in his current enlistment. Petitioner claims that he was 
not counselled about requesting a short term extension to allow for his TEB request to be 
approved. Enlisted service members must sign a new enlistment contract covering the 
commitment period. MilConnect reflected TEB as "denied" but Petitioner did not check after 
transfer because he thought the Navy would notify him ifhis TEB was denied. Note: Petitioner 
retired on 30 June 2013, at his High Year Tenure (HYT) date. See enclosures(1), (4), and (5). 

f. In correspondence attached as enclosure ( 4), Commander Navy Personnel Command 
(PERS-314) has recommended the request be denied. NAVADMIN 203/09 provided policies 
and procedures for Navy members to transfer their Post-9/11 GI Bill entitlement to eligible 
family members. 

1 Petitioner was not in full compliance with NAV AD MIN 203/09 because 
enlisted service members must document their additional service obligation in their "Soft" 
Expiration ofActive Obligated Service (SEA OS). The Petitioner did not adjust his SEA OS to 
match his HYT date. Additionally, Mil Connect states "Approximately 7 working days after 
successfully submitting your transfer request, you should check the TEB Application for your 
approval/rejection status. You WILL NOT be notified ofyour approval/rejection status by any 
other means." 

CONCLUSION 

Upon review and consideration ofall the evidence of record, the Board concludes that 
Petitioner's request warrants favorable action. The Board carefully weighed the observations 
made in enclosure (4) regarding Petitioner's responsibility. The Board found that had the 
Petitioner been given clear counselling from his command about his obligation to request an 
extention on his enlistment and document his additional service obligation in his "Soft" 
Expiration of Active Obligated Service (SEAOS), he would have followed the proper steps to 
successfully transfer his benefits. Additionally, the Board felt that the MilCorinect system 
should provide a proactive 'notice to the service member in the event that their TEB is denied, 
vice putting the responsibility on the service member to log back into the system to check the 
status. 

(2) Ensure their additional service obligation (officer and enlisted) is properly 
documented in their Electronic Service Record (ESR) before submitting a request. 
Because officers' service is indefinite, and they do not have contracts, their fouryear 
commitment is recorded on an Administrative Remarks, NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) 
in the ESR. They are advised requests would be disapproved for members whose ESR does 
not reflect the required additional service." 

Had the Navy provided the Petitioner with notice ofthe error, the Petitioner could have then 
taken the necessary steps to correct the problem. Although the proper administrative 
requirements were not completed by the Petitioner, which resulted in his TEB request being 
denied, the Petitioner served the maximum time allowable by law, and therefore the Board felt 
that under these circumstances a measure ofrelief is warranted. 

RECOMMENDATION: 

That Petitioner's naval record be corrected, where appropriate, to show that: 

a. Petitioner was granted an extension on his enlistment to allow for the successful 
submission of an online TEB request to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents 
on "15 December 2009." 

b. Upon completion of the above changes, COMNA VPERSCOM (PERS 314) will execute 
an approved Transferability ofEducational Benefits (TEB) application reflecting the transfer 
information. 

c. A copy ofthis Report ofProceedings will be filed in Petitioner's naval record. 

4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) ofthe revised Procedures of the Board for Correction ofNaval 
Records (32 Code ofFederal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that quorum was 
present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete 
record ofthe Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter. 

5. The foregoing action ofthe Board is submitted for your review and action. 

Executive Director