RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-03728
INDEX CODE: 100.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The AF IMT 964, PCS, TDY, or Training Declination Statement, dated 12 Sep
08, be removed from his records and he be reinstated in the Air Force.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He did not intend to sign the declination statement, but did so due to a
personal hardship. He requested cancellation of the declination statement;
however, his request was disapproved by HQ AFPC.
He wishes to continue serving in the Air Force, but now his Reentry (RE)
code of 3E is preventing him from doing so.
In support of the appeal, the applicant submits a copy of his request to
appeal the declination statement.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was approved for retraining in the Explosive Ordinance
Disposal (EOD) career field in Dec 07, with a class start date of 23 Sep
08. On 13 Aug 08, his commander approved his request for cancellation of
his orders to retrain due to personal changes in his life. On 2 Sep 08,
HQ AFPC/DPSOA notified him that his request to cancel his retraining could
not be supported. On 12 Sep 08, the applicant signed the AF Form 964
declining to get the required retainability for a permanent change of
station (PCS) in conjunction with his retraining. At that time, he
indicated by email he understood he would have to separate on 21 Oct 08,
his Date of Separation (DOS), and he would receive an RE code of “3E.”
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, stating, in part, that there is no evidence
of an error or an injustice. The applicant was approved for retraining
into the Explosive Ordinance career field and declined to obtain
retainability once his request to cancel the class was not supported by
leadership. Further, on 12 Sep 08, he stated in an email that he had
signed a declination statement and understood he would be separating on his
DOS and would receive an RE code of “3E.”
HQ AFPC/DPSOA’s complete 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 24 Oct
09 for review and comments, within 30 days. However, as of this date, no
response has been received by this office (Exhibit C).
________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case. Based on the
available evidence of record, it appears the applicant made his decision
after being advised that if he declined obtaining the required
retainability, he would be required to separate on his DOS. The Air Force
office of primary responsibility has addressed the issues of the case and
we are in agreement with the expressed rationale that the applicant has not
been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting
the relief sought in this application.
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 Docket Number BC-2008-03728
in Executive Session on 11 June 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member
Ms. Gregory A. Parker, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Oct 08, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOA, dated 16 Oct 08.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Oct 08.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02749
The remaining 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: HQ AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. On 29 Aug 06, the AFCC advised the applicant he met the qualifications for retraining into all of his requested AFSCs; that he would receive a separate email identifying...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03744
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03744 INDEX CODE: 108.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code “3E” (second-term or career airman who refused to get retainability for training or retraining or declined to attend PME), be changed to allow him to continue his career in...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02166
On 26 Jul 06, HQ Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) announced implementation of the FY07 NCORP and identified over 3000 NCOs, by order of vulnerability susceptible to retraining. All NCOs identified as vulnerable were given until 15 Jan 07 to submit their initial request, followed by a suspense of 28 Feb 07 to submit a completed application. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: The applicant states she is deployed in...
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...
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 | 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 | CY2007 | BC-2007-01504
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01504 INDEX CODE: 108.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 November 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code “3E” (second-term or career airman who refused to get retainability for training or retraining or declined to attend PME), be...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 00122
His Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) is 3P0X1 Security Forces. According to records on file with Air Force Retraining, the applicant was number 1 out of 180 (involuntary phase) SSgts identified as vulnerable for involuntary retraining into 180 quotas. The applicant was aware of the program requirements, but failed to submit the application as required and instructed.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03055
To this date there is no EFMP request on file, nor has the applicant submitted a completed retraining application. In this respect, we note the applicant was selected for involuntary retraining under the Noncommissioned Officer Retraining Program (NCORP) and was required to submit necessary documentation to determine his qualification/suitability for involuntary retraining to AFPC by 15 May 2006, or be determined to have declined retraining and face mandatory separation. NOVEL Panel...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01520
He received a message by electronic mail (e-mail) from the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) stating he was eligible for two Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSCs). All vulnerable NCOs identified as vulnerable in Phase I were given until 15 Jan 07 to submit an initial request, followed by a suspense of 28 Feb 07 to submit a completed application. The applicant failed to complete his retraining application under Phases I and II of the program, although fully aware of the program requirements.