ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  95-03402
            INDEX CODE:  134.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Air Training Command (ATC) Form 126A, Record of Commander’s Review
Action,  dated  2  September  1993,  reflecting   his   self-initiated
elimination (SIE) from the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA)  T-
41 Pilot Indoctrination Program (PIP) be  removed  from  his  records;
that he be provided an age waiver to apply  for  Undergraduate  Flying
Training (UFT); and that he be provided a waiver of the requirement of
five years of total active federal commissioned service (TAFCS).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

A misunderstanding during training on a make-up test date  caused  him
to retake the test before he was  ready  and  he  failed  again.   The
situation regarding his disenrollment from  the  Pilot  Indoctrination
Program (PIP) was not accurately recorded in  the  commander’s  review
process, nor was his disenrollment fair  due  to  the  information  he
received regarding his second procedural knowledge test (PKT).  He has
subsequently proven  his  ability  to  successfully  compete  for  and
complete Specialized  Undergraduate  Pilot  Training  (SUPT).   It  is
unjust to permanently disallow him from competing for  such  training.
As a cadet, second class, he did  not  understand  the  repercussions;
specifically, that he was barred  from  seeking  any  rated  position.
Consequently, he did not ask for  help  at  the  time  nor  fight  his
removal from the class because of this mistaken impression.   The  ATC
Form 126A was made known to him when he applied for an SUPT position.

In support, he provides  statements  from  the  eliminating  official,
flying instructors, squadron commanders, his  commander  at  the  USAF
Academy (USAFA), co-workers while on active duty,  and  the  chain  of
command disenrolling him from the PIP, as well as other documentation.
 In his statement, the former 557 FTS commander  supports  removal  of
the ATC Form 126A so that the  applicant  may  compete  for  SUPT  and
Specialized Undergraduate Navigator Training (SUNT). The  former  12OG
commander indicated in his statement that he could only recommend  the
contested ATC Form 126A be amended so the applicant may be  considered
for SUNT.

A copy of the applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s original application  was  considered  and  denied  in
Executive Session on 11 July 1996, because  of  insufficient  relevant
evidence (See AFBCMR 95-03402 at Exhibit D).

On 19 April 2000,  the  applicant  requested  reconsideration  of  the
application.   His  application  and  the  documentary   evidence   he
submitted in support of his appeal are at Exhibit E.

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System  (PDS)  indicates
that the applicant was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve  of  the
Air Force, on 1 June 1994.  He was  voluntarily  ordered  to  extended
active duty on the same date.  He is currently serving on active  duty
in the grade of captain, having been promoted to that grade, effective
1 June 1998.

According to the ATC Form 126A, dated 2  September  1993,  the  Acting
Operations Officer, 557 FTS, United States Air Force Academy  (USAFA),
recommended that the applicant be eliminated from the class  of  94-02
for “Self-initiated Elimination.”  The reviewing authority recommended
that  he  be  disenrolled  from  training;  not  be   considered   for
reinstatement in the  course  at  a  later  date;  be  considered  for
technical training; be considered for non-rated  operations  training;
and not be considered for specialized undergraduate navigator training
(SUNT).  The 557 FTS Commander approved the recommendations.

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.   Accordingly,
there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Chief,  Operations  Assignments  Division,  AFPC/DPAO,  does  not
support removal of the SIE documents.  However, if the Board favorably
considers the appeal--thereby making him eligible to  compete  on  the
late-rated Specialized Undergraduate Flying Training Selection Board--
he must submit his TAFCSD and age waiver requests IAW AFI 36-2205  and
IC 99-1, obtain concurrence from his chain of command, and forward  to
HQ USAF/CC for final action.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant  on  28 July
2000, for review  and  response  within  30  days  (Exhibit  G).   The
applicant stated that he learned from DPAOT3 that the reason  they  do
not support removal of the SIE documents is purely for  administrative
reasons.  He feels that the USAFA is the more  appropriate  office  to
provide an advisory opinion.  Therefore, he provided  a  copy  of  his
appeal to the USAFA 34th Operations Group Commander,  who  recommended
that the ATC Form 126A and the declination of UFT letter  be  removed.
Additionally,  the  applicant  suggests   that,   given   the   unique
circumstances of his case, the AFBCMR should  be  the  avenue  through
which his age  and  TAFCSD  waivers  are  approved.   The  applicant’s
complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

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 to warrant  granting  partial
relief.  After a careful and thorough examination of the documentation
pertaining to this case, the majority of the  Board  is  reluctant  to
amend the applicant’s records to the extent that the age and TAFCSD be
waived.  The evidence supplied by the applicant  persuaded  the  Board
majority that his request for a different instructor pilot (IP) due to
a personality conflict  with  his  IP/Flight  Commander  was  ignored.
Therefore, the Board majority believes that the ATC Form  126A,  dated
2 September 1993, wherein he  requested  elimination  from  the  USAFA
Flight Screening Program,  should  be  voided  and  removed  from  his
records.  However, the Board majority  believes  his  age  and  TAFCSD
waiver requests should be acted upon by his chain  of  command,  since
these officers are in the best position to  evaluate  the  applicant’s
capabilities.  Therefore, in the best interests of both the Air  Force
and the applicant, we recommend his records be corrected only to allow
him to  compete  on  the  Specialized  Undergraduate  Flying  Training
Selection Board.

4.  The documentation provided with this case was sufficient  to  give
the Board a clear understanding of the issues involved and a  personal
appearance, with or without counsel, would not have
materially added to that understanding.  Therefore, the request for  a
hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to  show  that  the  Air  Training
Command (ATC) Form 126A, Record of Commander’s  Review  Action,  dated
2 September 1993, be declared void and removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 2 November 2000, under the provisions of  AFI 36-
2603:

                  Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member
              Mr. John L. Robuck, Member

Messrs. Hauslein and Robuck voted to grant the applicant’s request for
removal of the ATC  Form  126A.   However,  they  voted  to  deny  the
applicant’s requests for an age waiver and a  waiver  for  the  5-year
TAFCSD.  Mr. Peterson voted to deny the application in  its  entirety,
but he did not desire to submit a minority opinion.

The following additional documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit D.  AFBCMR 95-03402, dated 18 Jul 1996, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Apr 2000, w/atchs.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFPC/DPAO, dated 17 Jul 2000.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 28 Jul 00.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 17 Aug 00, w/atchs.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair




AFBCMR 95-03402




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 the Air Training Command
(ATC) Form 126A, Record of Commander’s Review Action, dated 2
September 1993, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his
records.




                                       JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                       Director
                                       Air Force Review Boards Agency