RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS. IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00991 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His active duty service commitment (ADSC) for the Post 9/11 GI Bill, Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) to his dependents be waived and the TEB reinstated. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When he applied for and was subsequently approved for retirement, he was informed that all of his Active Duty Service Commitments (ADSCs) were waived. This oversight was only discovered after denial of his request for the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) to begin paying the education costs for his son’s college. He argues that he served with honor for more than 21 years. He was assigned to the Pentagon on 11 Sep 01, was a key planner for the Global War on Terror, and completed a year-long deployment to Baghdad. The post-9/11 GI Bill was intended to support veterans like him who served during a critical time in our nation’s defense. The oversight in clearing the waived ADSC is causing unintended restrictions on his earned benefit and transfer privilege. In support of his request, the applicant provided correspondence showing approval of the benefits transfer. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 27 Dec 89, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force. On 21 Dec 2010, the applicant requested to transfer unused Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to member(s) of his immediate family. Active Duty Service Date (ADSC) based on this transfer: 20 Dec 11. On 6 Jan 11, the applicant requested to retire in lieu of an assignment. On 31 Mar 11, the applicant retired and was credited with 21 years, 3 months, and 4 days of active service. 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 indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A thorough review of the applicant’s records reveal he elected to voluntarily retire prior to fulfilling his Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC). He signed and acknowledged his ADSC on his Statement of Understanding (SOU) which states: “I understand transfer of benefits is lost if I do not complete the entire commitment”. To retain TEB benefits, he had to serve through the Obligation End Date of 20 December 2011. The member applied for retirement on 16 December 2010 and his retirement request was approved on 25 January 2011. The applicant acknowledged the Post-9/11 GI Bill counseling statement on his Retirement Pre-Application Checklist which states: “If the member cannot satisfy the required ADSC prior to their DOS, then they are ineligible for TEB”. He voluntarily retired prior to fulfilling his ADSC; therefore, he is ineligible for the benefit. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 11 Sep 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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. 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 its rationale 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. 4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 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-2015-00991 in Executive Session on 28 Jan 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , ., Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-00991 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Mar 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 24 Mar 15. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Sep 15.