RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01509
INDEX CODE 115.03
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded command pilot wings.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Over 9800 hours of flying time as a pilot was not counted towards awarding
him command pilot wings.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is 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 at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AF/XOOT recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that
without source documents reflecting the applicant had 15 years of rated
service as a pilot and held an Instrument Rating qualification, they cannot
validate he met the requirements for award of Command Pilot Wings.
However, if he submits additional source documents, they can reconsider at
that time.
The AF/XOOT evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 19
July 2002 for review and comment 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. After a thorough review of the evidence
of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that he has
provided sufficient evidence to substantiate that he completed 15 years of
rated service as a pilot and held an Instrument Rating qualification.
Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these
assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the
rationale provided by the Air Force. Therefore, we agree with their
opinion and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision
that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered
either an error or an injustice. Hence, we find no compelling basis to
recommend granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
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 02-01509 in
Executive Session on 10 October 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member
Ms. Diane Arnold, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Apr 02, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AF/XOOT, dated 2 Jul 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Jul 02.
JOSEPH A. ROJ
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02208
Based on a review of the facts, we agree she should have met an FEB after her elimination from FWQ training as an FEB would be the only correct action to evaluate retention in (or removal from) training, and qualification for continued aviation service. She failed two opportunities to complete fixed wing training and should have met an FEB. ____________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01805
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AF/XOOT recommends the applicant, provided he now meets the minimum flying hour requirements for award of the pilot rating, first secure a helicopter pilot operational flying position and then submit an application to appear before an Aeronautical Review Board in accordance with AFI 11-402, paragraph 2.11. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AETC/DOF recommends that the applicant not be reinstated...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A. Based on the evidence provided they recommend denying the applicant's request. The applicant states the stress management program offered by Behavioral Services was not advertised when he was in SUPT.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02902
Reviewing Authority Recommendations, be changed from “Not be considered for reinstatement in this course at a later date” to “Be considered in this course at a later date.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: During the Commander’s Review discussion with his commander, he was told that he would be considered for reinstatement at a later date. Wing Commanders are the final elimination Approval Authority for undergraduate flying...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03579
XOOT states although he did perform combat jumps and was awarded the Vietnamese Parachutist Badge with 4 bronze stars, he was not assigned to an Air Force position requiring parachute duty. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 23 December 1965, he was awarded Air Force Jump Wings. NOVEL Panel Chair AFBCMR...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant indicated that the first and only notification he received regarding adding UPT gate months was AFPC’s Jul 95 letter. As a result of the policy change, the applicant had his records adjusted and fell one month short of his third gate under the ACIA of 1974. Prior to the policy change, the applicant fell 11 months short of his third gate credit.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03276
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03276 INDEX CODE: 107.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 29 April 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His WD AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation - Honorable Discharge, be updated to reflect his entitlement to wear Air Crew wings. He was hoping...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02986
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-02986 INDEX NUMBER: 112.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The period of lost time, 14 Sep 01 through 2 Nov 01 reflected on her DD Form 214 be removed. Her commander at the time she separated from service indicated on an AF Form 2098 that the period from 14 Sep 01...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00584 (Case 2) INDEX CODE: 100.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: It appears the applicant is requesting that his elimination from the Fixed- Wing Qualification Training Course (F-V5A-Q) be removed from his records. On 18 Nov 92, the XXst Flying Training Wing (FTW) commander concurred with the FEB’s findings and recommendations that the applicant should be...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00965
According to AFI 11-402, Para 8.2, Operational Support flying pertains to non-aircrew personnel required to perform temporary in-flight duties not associated with the aircraft’s primary mission. c. Applicant indicates there are personnel in the Air Force that are awarded the aircrew badge and become disqualified, never fly again, but are authorized to keep the badge. Because she did not receive all of the required training and her duties at home station are not primary aircrew, even though...