Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200283
Original file (0200283.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00283
            INDEX NUMBER:  100.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The AF Form 964, PCS,  TDY,  or  Training  Declination  Statement,  dated  7
August 2000, be removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust  and
the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts  pertaining  to  this  application,  extracted  from  the
applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter  prepared  by  the
appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAOM4 reviewed this application and recommended  denial.   A  complete
copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluation and provides a  response  that  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.  Sufficient relevant evidence  has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice.  In this respect, we  note  that  prior  to
attending formal training, the  applicant  was  advised  that  the  training
required one year of retainability; however, while attending  the  training,
he was advised that the training required three years of retainability.   In
support of the appeal, the  Superintendent  of  Outbound  Assignments/Formal
Training states that the applicant was miscounseled regarding  the  required
retainability for the training assignment.  The applicant states that  since
he did not want to incur the  additional  two  years  of  retainability,  he
declined to do so and as  a  result  is  now  ineligible  for  reenlistment,
promotion and assignment.  In view of this, and  since  the  applicant  made
his decision to accept the assignment and reenlist based  on  the  erroneous
information that he was provided, we do not believe  he  should  suffer  the
adverse affects of having  a  retainability  declination  statement  in  his
records. Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s  records  be  corrected  to
the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show  that  the  AF  Form  964,  PCS,  TDY,  or
Training Declination Statement, dated 7 August 2000, be  declared  void  and
removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board  considered  Docket  Number  02-00283  in
Executive Session on 16 April 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
                       Mr. George Franklin, Member
                       Mrs. Carolyn J. Watkins, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Jan 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAOM4, dated 1 Mar 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Mar 02.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 29 Mar 02, w/atch.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair

AFBCMR 02-00283




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the AF Form 964, PCS, TDY,
or Training Declination Statement, dated 7 August 2000, be, and hereby is,
declared void and removed from his records.








JOE G. LINEBERGER

Director

Air Force Review Boards Agency

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00741

    Original file (BC-2003-00741.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAAD indicated that AFI 36-2110, Paragraph 2.29.6.3, requires a member who refuses to get PCS retainability to sign an AF Form 964 (PCS, TDY, or Training Declination Statement). The applicant executed the AF Form 964 and the assignment was cancelled and his promotion line number was taken away. The applicant stated that his MPF failed to inform him that he would lose his promotion line number to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703128

    Original file (9703128.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states personnel at the Military Personnel Flight erroneously completed an AF Form 964 and updated this data (MPF) at which indichted he refbsed to get retainability for a PCS to the CONUS. Further, he states that he visited the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) on 12 Sep 97 where he was “promoted” to SSgt in an impromptu ceremony. Recommend the applicant’s record be corrected to reflect that he was promoted to staff sergeant effective and with DOR of 1 Sep 97.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03872

    Original file (BC-2012-03872.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility which are included at Exhibits C and F. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of his request for promotion reinstatement indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. ________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01747

    Original file (BC-2003-01747.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a 15 Nov 02 letter to the applicant, the Superintendent of the --rd Wing IG with the Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) advised that, following an interview, the briefer denied having the conversation with the applicant and asserted she had briefed countless individuals regarding declination statements and was well aware of the ramifications. The handout directed him to the MPF for counsel if his desire was to separate. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002956

    Original file (0002956.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 18 July 2000, she was informed that AFPC/DPAAD2 approved her request to withdraw the PCS declination statement and that she would not be able to test out of cycle because her package was not submitted in time. The applicant states that she turned down an assignment but was approved to stay in and believes she would have been approved before the cut off date for testing if her package had not been lost and resubmitted. After the commander disapproved her package, the FSO received the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900221

    Original file (9900221.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was told that by signing the form declining retraining he would still receive his promotion to staff sergeant but wouldn’t be able to test under future promotion cycles. During the involuntary retraining selection phase, personnel are allowed to submit available AFSC choices; however, the final decision is based on the needs of the Air Force as determined by the Headquarters Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC). As such, there was no error or injustice in applicant’s selection for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00469

    Original file (BC-2003-00469.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00469 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “3D”, “Second term or career airman who refused to get PCS or TDY assignment retainability”, be changed to one that will allow him to reenlist in the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00642

    Original file (BC-2005-00642.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She received 13 Airman/Enlisted Performance Reports for the combined rating period 7 March 1989 through 30 November 1999, in which the overall evaluations were “9,” “4,” “5,” 4,” “5,” “5,” “4,” “5,” “5,” “5,” “5,” “5,” and “5.” On 24 December 2000, applicant was honorably discharged by reason of completion of required active service, after serving 12 years, 9 months, and 17 days on active duty. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00299

    Original file (BC-2005-00299.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is his intention to join the Air Force Reserves or Active Duty Air Force as an officer, however, he cannot do so with a RE code of 3D. On the back of this RIP, he initialed the statement, “I have read and understand the returnee counseling handout and DEROS options available to me.” Paragraph 4b of the returnee counseling handout specifically states, “If, by the 25th day of the 8th month prior to your DEROS, you are eligible to obtain retainability and take no action, the Military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00574

    Original file (BC-2005-00574.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received orders nine months prior to his separation date and never had enough retainability for the assignment. According to information provided in the advisory prepared by the Air Force Office of Primary Responsibility at Exhibit C, the applicant was notified of an assignment on 12 May 04 and on 29 Sep 04 voluntarily declined the assignment by signing AF Form 964, “PCS, TDY or Training Declination Statement.” The applicant was separated on 9 Jan 05 after completion of required active...