DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 2990-16 NOV 28 2016 From: Chairman, Board for Correction ofNaval Records To: Secretary ofthe Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2)NAVADMIN 187/09of26Jun09 (3) NAV AD MIN 203/09 of 11 Jul 09 (4)NPCmemo 1780PERS-314dtd 11Jul16 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 9111 GI Bill benefits to his dependents. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner's allegations oferror and injustice on 21 September 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 ofrecord 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 I 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 200I. The act also includes a provision for qualifying service members to transfer educational benefits to dependents. General descriptions ofthe essential components ofthe 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 203109, released 11July2009. Under the guidance, "active duty sailors that separate, retire, transfer to the Fleet Reserve or who are discharged prior to I 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 (fEB) to his dependents in Mi!Connect on 21 December 2009. Petitioner asserts that he worked with a Region Legal Service Office Administrative Officer (AO) to sign a PG 13 committing to the extra 4 years ofservice. He states that he was informed by the AO that the Page 13 was posted to his ESR, however, this was not the case. Mil Connect reflected the TEB was "denied" but Petitioner did not check after transfer because he thought the Navy would notify him ifhis TEB was denied. Note: Petitioner retired 31March2015. See enclosures (I) and (4). e. In correspondence attached as enclosure ( 4), Commander Navy Personnel Command (PERS-314) has recommended the request be denied. 38 U.S.C. §3319, NAVADMIN 187/09, and NAVADMIN 203/09 provided policies and procedures for Navy members to transfer their Post-9/11 GI Bill entitlement to eligible family members. Petitioner was not in full compliance with Title 38 or the NAV ADMINs because he failed to ensure that the Page 13 commitment of additional service was uploaded in his ESR prior to attempting to TEB. Additionally, Mi!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." As the Petitioner failed to transfer his education benefits to his dependents while on active duty. Petitioner's dependents are no longer eligible to receive the benefits. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration ofall the evidence ofrecord, the Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable action. The Board carefully weighed the observations made in enclosure ( 4) regarding Petitioner's responsibility under the Post 9/11 GI Bill program. The Board found that had the Petitioner been given clear counselling from his command about his obligation to follow up to confirm the status ofhis TEB, he would have followed the proper steps to successfully transfer his benefits. Additionally, the Board felt that the Mi!Connect 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. Had the Navy provided the Petitioner with notice ofthe error, the Petitioner could have then taken the necessary steps to correct the problem. Furthermore, ifthe Petitioner hadn't received misinformation from the AO, he would not have assumed that the Page 13 was included in his ESR. Although the proper administrative requirements were not completed by the Petitioner, which resulted in his TEB request being denied, the Petitioner served more than four years from the date ofattempted TEB, 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 elected to transfer unused educational benefits through the DMDC Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) web application on 21 December 2009. b. Petitioner, in coordination with his command, completed the Page 13 acknowledgement of additional service obligation and successfully uploaded it to his ESR. Petitioner incurred four years additional service obligation, expiring on 20 December 2013. Note: Petitioner retired on 31March2015. c. NPC reviewed the Petitioner's TEB application, and it was approved on 21 December 2009. d. Upon completion ofthe above changes, COMNAVPERSCOM (PERS 314) will execute an approved Transferability ofEducational Benefits (TEB) application reflecting the transfer information. e. A copy ofthis Report ofProceedings will be filed in Petitioner's naval record. 4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) ofthe revised Procedures ofthe 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.