RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03323 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His transfer of eligibility (TEB) obligation date be adjusted from 29 November 2014 to 30 September 2012, to allow him to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill to his dependents. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His TEB request was approved on 14 December 2010 and he incurred a four-year active duty service commitment (ADSC). However, once he was twice passed over for promotion, he was involuntarily separated on 30 September 2012 and was unable to serve the entire period. In accordance with the requirements of 10 USC 632, he committed to the maximum amount of time allowed; which was his mandatory separation date. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Air Force who served from 19 August 2002 through 30 September 2012. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is included at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial. The applicant’s TEB request was reviewed and properly resulted in a four year ADSC based on his eligibility status and the date of the request, 30 November 2010. In order to retain the benefits, the applicant had to complete the obligation end date of 29 November 2014. Because he was passed over twice for promotion and separated prior to this date, he is ineligible for TEB. There is no provision in TEB guidance granting fulfillment of obligation in the event a member is twice passed over for promotion and subsequently separated. The following are acceptable reasons an ADSC/obligation end date can be considered fulfilled: death of the member, disability, Hardship or a Reduction in Force or Force Shaping discharge. The applicant did not fulfill his TEB obligation and is ineligible for the benefit. The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Air Force advisory states there is no provision in the TEB guidance granting fulfillment of an obligation in the event a member is passed over twice for promotion and subsequently separated. However, that same paragraph lists an acceptable reason for ADSC/obligation end date to be considered fulfilled is a Reduction in Force or Force Shaping. He contends that the Air Force FY11 Force Management Program leveraged several methods of involuntary separation to reduce the force size to a congressionally mandated level by 30 September 2012. It is for this reason, he advocates, that he should be afforded equal consideration under the law. Non-selection for promotion during the FY11 Force Management reductions falls under the same acceptable reason as Reduction in Force or Force Shaping discharge. He was approved for the TEB shortly before the CY10D promotion board met in December 2010 to consider his year group for promotion. Prior to the release of the promotion board results, the Air Force announced it FY11 Force Management Program in March 2011, with an end strength deadline of 30 September 2012. On 30 September 2012, he was involuntarily separated with the separation code JGB (Non-selection, permanent promotion”) listed in block 26 of his previously submitted DD Form 214. He had served for 10 years, 1 month and 3 days. He was honorably separated. Because he was not offered selective continuation, he was unable to fulfill his ADSC through no fault of his own. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. 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 note the applicant contends that he fulfilled his part of the contract to the maximum extent allowed and believes his separation is similar to those separated by a RIF or force shaping. However, he has not provided substantial evidence which, in our opinion, successfully refutes the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR). Therefore, we agree with the OPR and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion and find that the applicant has not provided proof of either an error or an injustice. In the absence of evidence the applicant was treated differently than others similarly situated, we find no equitable basis to grant the relief sought in this application. 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-2014-03323 in Executive Session on 11 May 2015 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Aug 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 7 Oct 15. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Feb 15. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant’s Response, undated, w/atchs.