RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03952
            INDEX CODE:  115.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His last 6  months  of  gate  time  be  waived  so  that  he  may  meet  the
requirements for his third flying gate.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Air Force needs and  discretionary  decisions  made  by  personnel  at  AFPC
inhibited  his  return  to  flying.   He  did  not  reach  the  third   gate
requirements due to multiple factors, which culminated in the AFPC  decision
to not reassign him to a flying organization.  He left flying in March  1991
with 126 gate months.  During the 1991 through 1997 timeframe he  served  on
several headquarters  staff  tours.   During  that  period,  the  Air  Force
downsized, his primary aircraft was retiring, and the timeframe was  an  era
of  Return-to-Fly  (RTF)  boards  and  volunteer  assignments.   Through   a
collection of events, rated shortage on staff positions and limited  2  seat
fighters, along with AFPC  discretion,  he  never  met  the  132-month  gate
requirement.  During that time frame he lost 2 months due to  extended  Duty
Not Including Flying (DNIF) and because his last flight in  March  1991  was
before the 15th of the month.  He asks that those months be reinstated.   In
addition, applicant states that during the 1991 through  1997  timeframe  he
participated in aerial flight on five different occasions supporting  combat
operations and aircrew training.  If allowed credit  for  the  2  months  he
lost and credit for the flights during which he used his extensive  aviation
and Electronic Warfare expertise to support  actual  flights  within  combat
zones, he would then be able to accumulate 132 gate months.

His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving on extended  active  duty  in  the  grade  of
colonel, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of  rank  of  1
Nov 02.

He completed 126 months of OFDA by 1 Oct 91 and was assigned  to  transition
status code "C," requiring him to complete 120 months  of  OFDA  to  entitle
him to Aviation Continuation  Incentive  Pay  (ACIP)  through  22  years  of
aviation service and 144  for  entitlement  through  25  years  of  aviation
service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

USAF/XOOT recommends denial.   XOOT  states  that  the  applicant  does  not
qualify for an Operational Flying Duty Accumulator (OFDA)  waiver.   Current
policy manages rated officers to 10 years of operational flying (120  months
of OFDA).  It is a  member's  responsibility  to  manage  their  assignments
through their third flying gate.  The applicant was aware of his  OFDA  gate
requirements when he stopped flying in March 1991  and  he  volunteered  for
all  but  one  of  his  inactive  assignments.   He  was  not  afforded   an
opportunity to fly in 1993, accounting for only two of his  8-year  inactive
period prior to meeting his  18-year  flying  gate.   He  did  not  actively
solicit assignments to return to fly; therefore, he did not  accumulate  the
required 144 months for entitlement to 25 years of aviation service  and  is
only entitled to ACIP through 22 years of aviation service.   He  cannot  be
given  constructive  credit  for  orientation  flights  since  he  was   not
qualified in any of the aircraft he received orientation  flights,  nor  was
he on aeronautical  orders  authorizing  frequent  and  regular  operational
flying duty.

The XOOT evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The XOOT evaluation alludes to the conclusion that he avoided  returning  to
the cockpit, which is not the case.  In 1993, he was  not  selected  by  the
RTF board.  During the all-volunteer assignment  period,  any  assignment  a
member ended up with gave the appearance that  he/she  volunteered  for  the
job.  This however, does not  portray  the  telephone  conversations  during
which the possibilities and availabilities of cockpits were  discussed,  nor
does it portray the guidance offered by assignment officers.  He  challenges
the notion that all responsibility rests  upon  the  individual's  shoulders
after the 120 month time frame to manage his  gate  months.   This  suggests
that an officer should find a "work-around"  to  the  assignment  system  if
sent to a non-flying job in order to meet gate time.  All an officer can  be
expected  to  do  is  contact  his  assignments  officer,  discuss  options,
volunteer for what is available, and serve where assigned.

The period of the 90's saw a tremendous drawdown in aircraft  available  for
fighter Weapons Systems Officers (WSOs) with the retirement of the  F-4  and
F-111.  Through bad luck  and  poor  timing,  cockpits  were  not  available
during his permanent change of station periods.  Instead his  expertise  was
greatly needed in  the  staff/support  community  to  replace  the  loss  of
fighter pilots.

His complete submission is at 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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice that would warrant granting a waiver of  his
flying gate requirements.  Applicant contends that factors  outside  of  his
control inhibited his ability to meet  his  flying  gate  requirements.   We
took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits  of
the case; however, we do not find his assertions sufficiently persuasive  to
override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  The Air Force  assignment
system focuses on assignment equity and the individual's desires and  needs;
however, the needs of the Air Force  remain  paramount.   Evidence  has  not
been  presented  which  would  lead  us  to  believe  that  the  appropriate
standards were not applied, that  he  was  denied  any  of  the  rights  and
privileges he was entitled to, or  that  he  was  treated  differently  than
other  similarly  situated  individuals.   Therefore,  in  the  absence   of
persuasive 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 issue  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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2002-
03952 in Executive Session on 3 Jun 03, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
      Mr. George Franklin, Member
      Mrs. Carolyn J. Watkins-Taylor, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Dec 02, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, USAF/XOOT, dated 3 Mar 03.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Mar 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 22 Mar 03.




                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair