RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-00412
            INDEX CODE:  115

            COUNSEL:  ANTHONY W. WALLUK


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  elimination  from  the  Joint  Specialized  Undergraduate   Pilot
Training (JSUPT) be removed from his record and that he be allowed  to
reenter training in JSUPT at  either  Columbus  AFB,  Mississippi,  or
Laughlin AFB, Texas.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not given  adequate  time  and/or  training  to  allow  him  to
reasonably progress  through  the  training  syllabus  at  Vance  AFB,
Oklahoma.  His flight commander imposed unique  training  requirements
and took improper actions in grading him.   When  he  was  sent  to  a
commander’s review, he was denied the opportunity to present  evidence
in his behalf and the unit manipulated the presentation  of  witnesses
to ensure that witnesses that were favorable to him were not heard  by
the decision maker.  The combination of these factors resulted in  the
inappropriate and unnecessary removal of an excellent pilot  candidate
from training.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached 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.   Accordingly,  there  is  no
need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Undergraduate Flying Operations, HQ 19TH  AF/DOU,  reviewed
this  application  and  indicated  that  with  regard  to  applicant’s
statements concerning inappropriate grading  practices,  selection  of
instructors who flew with him, and, improper flight commander actions,
all have been  found  to  be  without  merit.   Additionally,  he  was
concerned about not being allowed to present letters or witnesses that
supported his case.  Initially, it appears that the letter from one of
his T-34 instructor’s should have been allowed because  it  was  dated
the same day he was notified of the commander’s review.  It cannot  be
determined if the letter was received within the two-day  time  limit;
however, the Chief agrees with the 71st FTW Commander when  he  stated
the letter or the testimony from the T-34 instructor  would  not  have
made a difference.  The applicant’s T-34 training is not at issue; his
performance in T-34 training was fine and he receives full credit  for
all that he achieved in  T-34s,  without  question.   His  failure  to
consistently land the fast moving and highly demanding  T-38  was  the
reason for his elimination.  Completing a previous phase  of  training
does not guarantee success in follow-on  training.   On  average,  the
Chief sees a failure rate of 4% in T-38 training.

The claim that the flight commander had an inappropriate vendetta  and
violates  regulations  to  eliminate  students  appears  false.    The
attrition rate for the past year has been lower than programmed and at
the same time, attrition at  the  follow-on  course,  Introduction  to
Fighter Fundamentals, is at a record high.  This data  would  indicate
that individuals are getting every opportunity to  get  complete  T-38
training.  Additionally, a squadron supervisor investigated the flight
commander’s  history  involving   students   who   were   experiencing
difficulty in the program; no indications of personal  vendettas  were
noted.  Elimination rates among all T-38  flights  at  Vance  AFB  are
evenly distributed which would  further  indicate  that  students  are
receiving equal treatment.   DOU  recommends  applicant’s  request  be
denied.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Counsel for the  applicant  reviewed  the  Air  Force  evaluation  and
provided a two-page response.  Applicant also  provided  a  memorandum
for record in response to the advisory opinion (see Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or  injustice.   After  reviewing  the
evidence of record, including the statements from the VT-3  instructor
pilot, we  do  not  concur  with  the  final  decision  to  disqualify
applicant from JSUPT.  In this respect, we note  that  the  instructor
pilot  stated,  in  his  28 Sep  98  letter,  that   his   letter   of
recommendation supporting applicant’s case  never  made  it  into  the
applicant’s package.  We cannot conclusively determine if  the  letter
or, for that matter, the testimony from  the  instructor,  would  have
made a difference in the commander’s review, however,  we  believe  it
served to deny the applicant a fair review of his case.  Additionally,
the instructor pilot also stated that the applicant’s  flying  ability
in the T-34 was solid and that he  had  the  drive  and  integrity  to
become a fine  Air  Force  pilot.   In  addition,  we  note  that  the
applicant completed all requirements of Joint Primary Flight Training,
accumulating over 110 flight hours in the T-34C aircraft and  over  35
hours in the T-34C simulator.  The evidence before this Board strongly
suggests that the applicant has the ability to be a pilot.  In view of
the totality of the circumstances, the serious pilot shortage that the
Air Force is currently experiencing, and the applicant’s strong desire
to fly, we believe that he should  be  given  another  opportunity  to
pursue the training regimen.  Whether he is successful will depend  on
his own ability.  Therefore, we recommend the applicant be  reinstated
to JSUPT.

4.    Applicant’s request to reenter training at either  Columbus  AFB
or Laughlin AFB was considered; however, we believe that in  order  to
return applicant to flight training as expeditiously as possible,  the
Air Force is in a better position to determine where the training will
take place.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

      a.    The Record of Commander’s Review Action, AETC  Form  126A,
dated 13 October 1998, be declared void and removed from his records.

      b.    Providing he is otherwise qualified, he  be  entered  into
next available Joint Specialty Undergraduate  Pilot  Training  (JSUPT)
class.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 24 June and 12 July 1999, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Henry Romo, Jr., Panel Chair
                  Ms. Ann L. Heidig, Member
              Ms. Sophie A. Clark, Member
              Mrs. Joyce Earley, Examiner (without vote)

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Feb 99, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ 19 AF/DOU, dated 7 Apr 99.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Apr 99.
     Exhibit D.  Fax fr counsel, dated 19 May 99, w/atchs.




                                   HENRY ROMO, JR.
                                   Panel Chair


INDEX CODE:  115

AFBCMR 99-00412




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        , be corrected to show that

                 a.    The Record of Commander’s Review  Action,  AETC
Form 126A, dated 13 October 1998, be, and hereby is, declared void and
removed from his records.

                       b.    Providing he is otherwise qualified,  he
be entered into next available Joint  Specialty  Undergraduate  Pilot
Training (JSUPT) class.









                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER

                                        Director
                                         Air  Force   Review   Boards
Agency