RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02250 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill Educational benefits to his dependent children. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His last duty station was the Defense Attaché Office at the US Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand; however, he out-processed at Scott Air Force Base (AFB). At no time in this process was he informed of the new Post 9-11 GI Bill or the fact that his dependents had to be elected eligible for this benefit. Now that his children are approaching college age he recently found out that he had to make the transfer election prior to his retirement. He was never told this while on active duty and he views this as unjust. The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his untimely application because he had no reason to look into this before his children reached college age and was surprised that Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Air Force did not brief him on how the benefit worked at his retirement out-processing. Furthermore, his oldest son just finished his first year at the Air Force Academy and his second child has received a Type 7 AF ROTC scholarship. His delay in researching and submitting this application were because of the scholarships they received. However, his other children will graduate high school in 2016 and therefore he is now requesting this correction in anticipation of transferring the benefit to one of them. One, three, or eight years makes no difference as it is still the benefit he earned and should be allowed to transfer it to his dependents. The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant retired from the Air Force in the grade of Major (Maj, O-4) effective 31 May 06. Post-9/11 GI Bill Transferability: Any Service member on or after 1 August 2009, who is entitled to the Post-9/11 GI Bill at the time of the approval of his or her request to transfer that entitlement, may transfer that entitlement provided he or she meets one of these conditions: * Has at least 6 years of service in the Military Services (active duty or Selected Reserve), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Commissioned Officer Corps (NOAA) Corps, or Commissioned Corps of the Public Health Service (PHS) on the date of approval and agrees to serve 4 additional years in the Military Services, NOAA Corps, or PHS from the date of election. * Has at least 10 years of service in the Military Services (active duty or Selected Reserve), NOAA Corps, or PHS on the date of approval, is precluded by either standard policy (Service or DoD) or statute from committing to 4 additional years, and agrees to serve for the maximum amount of time allowed by such policy or statute. 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 B. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial. DPSIT states, the member retired effective 31 May 06. By law and DoD regulations, the program for the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) started 1 Aug 09. According to 38 USC, Chapter 33, Section 3319 (f) (1) "an individual...may transfer such entitlement only while serving as a member of the armed forces when the transfer is executed." Based on the applicant’s retirement date, he retired prior to the TEB program being established and therefore, he is not eligible to transfer benefits to his dependents. 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 10 Oct 14 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 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 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 and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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-2014-02250 in Executive Session on 20 Feb 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 May 14. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 30 Jun 14. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Oct 14.