From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. § 1552 (b) BUPERSNOTE 1780 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Subject’s naval record 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (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 education benefits to eligible dependents. 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 18 June 2020 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval record, 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, found that, before applying to this Board, he exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. The Board made the following findings: a. The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational 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 provision for qualifying service members to transfer education benefits to their eligible dependents. General descriptions of the essential components of the law were widely available beginning in summer 2008 but specific implementing guidance was not published until summer 2009. b. In accordance with reference (b), the option to transfer a Service member’s unused education benefits to an eligible dependent required a 4-year additional service obligation at the time of election for those eligible to retire on or after 1 August 2012. Additionally, enlisted personnel were required to have sufficient time on contract to meet the additional service requirement prior to initiating their electronic transfer election. Furthermore, the policy directed members to periodically check the status of their application. If the request was disapproved, members were required to take corrective action and reapply with a new service obligation end date. Moreover, there were provisions in the policy that indicated if a member was prohibited from completing their service obligation as a result of Navy or Department of Defense policy, or federal statute, the obligation would be adjusted to the maximum amount of time allowed by that policy or statute. c. Petitioner’s Active Duty Service Date was 27 January 1999. d. Petitioner executed NAVPERS 1070/601, Immediate Reenlistment Contract on 27 May 2011 for a term of 4-years. e. Petitioner submitted Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) applications on 26 September 2012, and 14 January 2016. The Service rejected both applications indicating Petitioner had not committed to the required additional service time. f. Petitioner executed NAVPERS 1070/601, Immediate Reenlistment Contract on 23 March 2016 for a term of 4-years. g. Petitioner submitted final TEB application on 29 March 2016. The Service approved the application with an obligation end date (OED) of 22 March 2020. h. On 23 November 2018, the Service disapproved Petitioner’s request to transfer to Fleet Reserve and directed him to resubmit for June 2019 to align with his projected rotation date (PRD). i. On 8 January 2019, Petitioner submitted NAVPERS 1306/7, Enlisted Personnel Action Request requesting to match his PRD with his End of Active Obligated Service (EAOS) of March 2020 and allow for Fleet Reserve transfer at EAOS on 22 March 2020. The request was approved by the Commanding Officer the same date. j. Petitioner transferred to the Fleet Reserve effective 1 December 2019. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. Petitioner was approved to transfer Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits; however, he retired 4-months prior to completing his service obligation. The Board found that Petitioner provided sufficient documentation reflecting he attempted to remain on active duty beyond his OED of 22 March 2020 but was directed to retire earlier. The Board felt that under these circumstances, relief is warranted. RECOMMENDATION That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected, where appropriate, to show that: Petitioner elected to transfer unused education benefits to /3-months, /3-months, /24-months, /3-months and /3-months, through the MilConnect TEB portal on 27 May 2011. Commander, Navy Personnel Command (PERS-314) reviewed Petitioner’s TEB application, and it was approved on 27 May 2011 with a 4-year service obligation. A copy of this Report of Proceedings will be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. 4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)), and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of the reference, has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.