RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-05030 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational benefits to his dependent. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He discovered the error on 21 November 2014; however, provides no justification as to why his failure to timely file should be waived in the interest of justice. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s Total Federal Active Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 12 August 2003. The applicant was honorably discharged from the Regular Air Force in the grade of senior airman (E-4) effective 11 August 2009. He was credited with 6 years of active service. Transferability of Unused Education Benefits to Family Members. Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) on or after 1 August 2009 who meets Post-9/11 GI Bill eligibility requirements and at the time of the approval of the member’s request to transfer entitlement to educational assistance the member meets one of the following: Has at least 6 years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve, NOAA Corps, or PHS) on the date of application and agrees to serve four additional years in the Air Force from the date of request, regardless of the number of months transferred, or Has at least 10 years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve, NOAA Corps, or PHS) on the date of application, is precluded by either Air Force policy (e.g., High Year Tenure [HYT]), DoD policy or statute from committing to four additional years of service and agrees to serve for the maximum amount of time allowed by such policy or statute. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Based on the applicant's TAFMSD, he would have incurred a 4-year Active Duty Service Commitment with Transfer of Educational Benefits (TEB) approval. However, he did not request to TEB to his dependent, nor did he agree to serve four additional years in the Air Force. A complete copy of the DPSIT evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 3 June 2015, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The applicant was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-05030 in Executive Session on 18 August 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 December 2014. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 22 January 2014 [sic], w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 June 2015. 1 2