Citation Nr: 25005508 Decision Date: 04/23/25 Archive Date: 04/23/25 DOCKET NO. 18-02 207 DATE: April 23, 2025 REMANDED Entitlement to Post-9/11 GI Bill (Chapter 33) educational assistance benefits is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Navy from May 2007 to September 2017. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2017 administrative decision issued by the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ), a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) at a hearing in July 2024. Entitlement to Chapter 33 educational assistance benefits is remanded. The Post-9/11 GI Bill provides for VA educational assistance for members of the Armed Forces based on active-duty service after September 10, 2001. 38 U.S.C. § 3311; 38 C.F.R. § 21.9520. Basic eligibility for Chapter 33 education benefits is established where an individual served a minimum of 90 aggregate days on active duty after September 10, 2001, and separated from active duty service with an honorable discharge. 38 C.F.R. §§ 21.9505, 21.9520. VA law pertaining to Chapter 33 education benefits excludes certain periods of service from the definition of active duty service; in particular, active duty does not include a period of service that was terminated because the individual was erroneously enlisted. 38 U.S.C. § 3311(d)(3); 38 C.F.R. § 21.9505(3)(ii)(C). Here, the Veteran seeks eligibility for Chapter 33 education benefits. The AOJ denied his claim for Chapter 33 benefits based on a lack of qualifying active duty service. The Veteran's DD Form 214 indicates 10 years, 3 months, and 21 days of active service, all occurring after September 10, 2001. It further indicates he was honorably discharged from service; the narrative reason for separation reads, "erroneous entry (other)." The AOJ found that this separation code indicated the Veteran's active duty service was terminated because he was erroneously enlisted, and therefore this period of service is not active service for the purposes of Chapter 33 benefits. In the course of this appeal, the Veteran submitted a letter from the person who was his Commanding Officer at the time of his discharge from service. The Commanding Officer reported that, prior to submitting the Veteran's separation paperwork, he contacted his Judge Advocate General (JAG) officer and the Veteran's counsel about the separation code, and that both stated the Veteran would be able to receive full VA benefits, including GI Bill. The record does not contain the Veteran's service personnel records. As there is evidence the service department did not intend to prevent the Veteran from receiving educational assistance benefits, a remand is necessary to obtain the service personnel records so that VA may determine whether the separation code recorded on the Veteran's DD Form 214 is determinative in this matter. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Attempt to obtain from the appropriate repositories all service personnel records that are not already of record, and associate those documents with the claims file. In particular, attempt to obtain documentation of the administrative proceedings leading to the Veteran's discharge from service. All such attempts should be documented in the claims file. If the service personnel records are unavailable, the Veteran's file must be documented clearly to that effect and the Veteran notified in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). Cynthia M. Bruce Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Josey, Counsel The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.