RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02576 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he transferred his Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits (TEB) to his dependent, effective 20 September 2012. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was misinformed by the base education office when told he was unable to meet the TEB requirements because of his high year tenure (HYT) date. He was informed that as of 1 August 2012, all TEB approvals would incur a four year active duty service commitment (ADSC). Therefore, in his case the required ADSC would extend through September 2016 and his HYT date was 23 March 2016, making him ineligible for TEB. He received notification in July 2013 that the retirement eligibility criteria expiration was adjusted from August 2012 to August 2013. Therefore, at this time his retirement eligibility criteria would require a three year ADSC until July 2016, which still extended beyond his HYT date of 23 March 2016. He received confirmation from the education office in February 2014 of his ineligibility for TEB due to the four year ADSC; however, he was advised to contact the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) to inquire as to whether or not a senior master sergeant select could transfer benefits before April 2014. If promoted to senior master sergeant his new HYT would be 23 March 2018 and he would need to accomplish a TEB prior to the end of March 2014. He was informed by AFPC that he was never ineligible to submit his TEB request because his HYT would become his ADSC. Therefore, due to the incorrect guidance, he should be allowed to have his TEB date adjusted to when he first attempted the transfer on 20 September 2012, with a three year ADSC. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial. Although the applicant indicates that he was misinformed, according to the Right Now Technology, the applicant never made contact with the Total Force Service Center (TFSC) personnel to inquire about his TEB eligibility. In addition, he does not provide a point of contact in which he discussed his TEB eligibility. Without a TEB request made through MilConnect, eligibility determination could not be made. However, according to the Defense Manpower Data center (DMDC), the applicant has since applied and was approved for TEB on 14 February 2014 and incurred a four year ADSC until 13 February 2018. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit B. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 17 November 2014 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2.  The application was timely filed. 3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. The applicant’s complete submission was thoroughly reviewed; however the Board majority is not persuaded the applicant is the victim of an error or injustice. We note the applicant’s contentions that he was erroneously informed that he was unable to meet the Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits transfer requirements due to his high year tenure date. However, as noted by AFPC/DPSIT he has not provided sufficient evidence showing that he was not properly counseled or that he was denied the opportunity to timely transfer benefits to his dependents. Therefore, the Board majority adopts the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility as the basis for our determination that that applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, the Board majority finds no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02576 in Executive Session on 23 March 2015 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny the applicant’s request. XXXX voted to correct the record; however, he declined to submit a minority report. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 June 2014. Exhibit B.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 23 July 2014. Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 November 2014.