RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03501 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits (TEB) to his dependent. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was never told he had to elect to have his TEB transferred to his dependents while on active duty. He only discovered this fact when he recently attempted to make the transfer. Had he been informed that this was necessary in 2009 when the program was first implemented, he would have had the retainabilility to take advantage of the benefit. Additionally, when he went through the retirement process, his command did not have an out-processing checklist and as an Individual Mobile Augmentee (IMA) Reservist, he “typically would slip through the cracks on briefings and in this case he is a victim.” The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his untimely application, because he just recently discovered that there was an error. In support of his appeal the applicant submits e-mails to his unit and HQ AFOSI outlining his request for a retirement checklist, as well a copy of his retirement orders. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant served in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of master sergeant (E-7) during the period of time in question. On 20 Jul 11, the applicant became retirement eligible. In accordance with AFI 36-2306, Para A9.18.1.4.4. “For those members eligible for retirement after 1 Aug 10 and on or before 1 Aug 11, two years of additional service from the date of request is required.” Based on the date he became eligible to retire, he would have incurred a two-year active duty service commitment (ADSC) obligation from the date he applied for the TEB. If he applied when the program was implemented in 2009 he would have fulfilled his commitment prior to his retirement. On 4 May 14, the applicant retired, after which point he was no longer able to request the transfer of educational benefits. 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: ARPC/DPTT recommends denial. DoDI 1341.13 clearly states that allocations cannot be made to a new family member after retirement or separation. The applicant did not make a request for transfer prior to his retirement date of 4 May 12. While the applicant may not have been aware of his ability to transfer education benefits prior to his retirement, the information was made available to every member via AFRC channels, ARPC email, education offices and various websites. Although the transfer cannot be made, the applicant maintains the ability to use the Post-9/11 benefit himself. If the decision is to grant the relief sought, a transfer request will have to be generated on behalf of the applicant and approved by the approval authority. A complete copy of the ARPC/DPTT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation, was forwarded to the applicant on 17 Nov 14 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. The application was timely filed. 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. The applicant believes that the passage from the Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008 regarding his fulfillment of service subsequent to 9/11 should make him eligible for TEB; however, the board does not find merit in his argument. The Board notes the purpose of the TEB is to promote recruitment and the retention of service members. Accordingly, the definition of service members found in DoDI 1341.13, Post-9/11 GI Bill, specifically excludes retired service members. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the board recommends the requested relief be denied. 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 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-2014-03501 in Executive Session on 23 Mar 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Aug 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Master Personnel Record Exhibit C. Letter, ARPC/DPTT, dated 16 Oct 14, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Nov 14.