RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00642
INDEX CODE: 112.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 AUGUST 2006
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 3D be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
To the best of her knowledge she has completed all enlistments,
including extensions that have been given to her without any service
breaks or interruptions of any kind. She also was not told about the
reentry code or any other code when given her DD Form 214. She was
asked to verify her personal information only which is correct.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of her DD Form 214,
copies of three honorable discharge certificates, a copy of her
separation orders, a copy of her Permanent Change of Station (PCS)
orders, a copy of her latest extension document and copies of her
airman/enlisted performance reports.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 8 March 1988. Highest
grade held on active duty was staff sergeant. 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. She received an RE code of 3D -
Second-term or career airman who refused to get PCS or TDY assignment
retainability.
The applicant is currently an active member of the Air Force Reserve
in the grade of technical sergeant, having been promoted to that grade
on 1 May 2003. Her Effective Date of Initial Gain to Strength (EDIGS)
is 20 September 2001. As of the Retirement Year Ending 2004, she was
credited with 15 years, 9 months and 17 days of satisfactory Federal
service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE states on 6 September 2000, the applicant signed and dated
an AF Form 964, PCS, TDY or Training Declination Statement for CONUS
assignment consideration. She also specifically initialed “I
understand that my declination to obtain full retainability to fulfill
an Air Force requirement is incompatible with a career or continuing a
career in the Air Force. I have read the rules in AFRs 35-16 and 39-
29 pertaining to loss of reenlistment (including extension of
enlistment) and promotion eligibility for airmen who decline
retainability.” Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s
request.
A complete copy of the evaluation, with her AF Form 964, PCS, TDY or
Training Declination Statement, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 15 April 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to
the applicant for review and response within 30 days. 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. Evidence has not been presented
that would lead us to believe the applicant’s RE code is erroneous or
unjust. The evidence indicates the applicant was ineligible to
reenlist based on her official written declination to obtain
retainability for PCS assignment consideration. By signing this form,
she signaled her understanding that she would not be eligible to
reenlist and there was no guarantee she would be able to enlist in the
Air Force under the prior service program following her separation.
There is no indication in the available record that the applicant was
miscounseled or coerced in any way to sign this form. We note the
applicant’s RE code is waiverable for the purposes of reentry in the
armed forces. Whether a request for a waiver to permit her reentry is
approved, however, would be based on the needs of the service to which
she applies. It appears she has exercised this option by applying and
being accepted for entry into the Air Force Reserve. In view of the
above and absent evidence by the applicant showing her RE code
assigned at the time of her discharge from the Regular component is
contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation or unjust, we
are not inclined to favorably consider her request.
_________________________________________________________________
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 this application, AFBCMR
docket No. BC-2005-00642, in Executive Session on 30 June 2005, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member
Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Feb 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 11 Apr 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Apr 05.
LAURENCE M. GRONER
Panel Chair
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF MILITARY RECORDS
CASE TRANSMITTAL / COORDINATION RECORD
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO:
JANETTE Y. CAMPBELL, 163-58-3024 BC-2005-00642
ROUTE IN TURN INITIALS DATE
1. CHIEF EXAMINER ________ ________
(Coord/Signature)
2. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ________ ________
(Coordination)
3. MR. LAURENCE M. GRONER ________ ________
PANEL CHAIR
(Signature on Proceedings)
4. AFBCMR (Processing)
PHYLLIS L. SPENCE
EXAMINER
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OF MILITARY RECORDS
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00739
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00739 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 29 AUG 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow him to reenter military service. I have read the rules in Air Force Regulations (AFRs) 35-16 and 39-29 pertaining to loss of...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00299
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
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00469
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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-03677
The Personnel Data System (PDS) reflects the applicant failed to get retainability for PCS or TDY by the remarks code 80 which reflects the servicemember failed to get retainability for PCS or TDY. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 April 2006, for review and response. He was...
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-2003-00741
_________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-01747
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...
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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-03872
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...