RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00299
		
	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  28 JULY 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 3D (Completion of Required Active Service) be changed to 1J to allow enlistment in the Air Force Reserves or Active Duty.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His separation from the Air Force was due to his enlistment coming to an end. His discharge was honorable, and he never turned down an assignment or a temporary duty (TDY). He was never told that his ability to reenter the Armed Forces, Reserves or Active Duty, would be affected by anything that was listed on his DD Form 214. 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.  Again, he was never presented with a permanent change of station (PCS) or a TDY that was turned down.

In support of his request, applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. 

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 30 November 1994.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of   1 February 2001.  

Approaching the end of his tour assigned to the 48th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron, RAF Lakenheath, England, the applicant signed a DEROS election option report on individual personnel (RIP).  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 Personnel Flight (MPF) will accomplish an AF Form 674, PCS, TDY or Training Declination Statement, on your behalf.”

On 14 January 2003, the applicant signed and dated an AF Form 964, PCS, TDY or Training Declination Statement for CONUS assignment consideration.  He 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 retainabilty.”

Applicant was honorably discharged for completion of required active service on 19 June 2003, after serving 8 years, 5 months and 20 days on active duty.  He was issued an RE code 3D (Second-term or career airman who refused to get PCS or TDY assignment retainability.” 

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied and states that the applicant fully understood the repercussion of declining retainability for a valid Air Force need.

AFPC/DPPAE complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPAAD recommends the application be denied and states that the applicant was provided an opportunity to obtain the required retainability for a PCS assignment to a valid Air Force requirement.  The referenced documents indicate the applicant was informed of the repercussions related to the available courses of action and he made an informed decision to refuse to obtain the required retainability for a PCS assignment.  Based on the applicant’s decision, the appropriate reentry code (3D) was assigned in accordance with applicable Air Force guidance.

AFPC/DPAAD complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 1 April 2005 for review and response in 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In this respect, the Board notes that the applicant signed a statement of understanding acknowledging his declination to obtain full retainability would render him ineligible for reenlistment. As a result, he was assigned an RE code of 3D.  It appears the applicant’s RE code was appropriately assigned and accurately reflected the circumstances of his separation, and we find no evidence to indicate the assigned RE code was in error.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to recommend favorable action on the applicant’s request that his RE code of 3D be changed. 

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 BC-2005-00299 in Executive Session on 4 May 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

			 , Panel Chair
			 , Member
			 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Jan 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAAD, dated 22 Feb 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 28 Mar 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Apr 05.

                                   XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                                   Panel Chair