RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-03742
            INDEX NUMBER:  115.00
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  None

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  declination  of  Specialized  Undergraduate  Navigator  Training
(SUNT) be removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was selected for active duty SUNT during  the  same  week  he  was
selected for a pilot slot in a Reserve unit.  He has been striving to
become an Air Force pilot for many years, so he submitted packages to
the Air Force Reserve, Air National Guard, and active Air Force.   He
applied for both pilot and navigator training  with  the  active  Air
Force and was selected for SUNT.  He had an interview with a  Reserve
unit only two days after the results of the active duty  applications
were released.  He was selected for a pilot position with the Reserve
unit, but still had to meet the  official  Reserve  selection  board,
which did not convene until six months later.  When the Reserve board
released the list of selectees, he was not on it.  When  he  declined
active  duty  navigator  training,  he  also  turned  in   separation
paperwork in order to fly with the Reserves.  He currently has a date
of separation (DOS) of 12 Feb 05.  If he had not been selected by the
Reserve unit to fly with them, he would  not  have  turned  down  the
active duty navigator training.

In support of his appeal, applicant submits  documentation  regarding
his selection for  active  duty  SUNT,  his  nonselection  for  pilot
training by the Air Force Reserve, and letters of recommendation.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is presently serving on active duty  in  the  grade  of
captain.  His Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD)  is
5 Nov 99.  He had an approved separation date  of  12  Feb  05  after
voluntarily declining his assignment  to  SUNT  under  the  seven-day
option.  His approved separation has since been cancelled.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAO recommends denial of  the  applicant’s  request.   The  Air
Force must remain consistent with  the  policy  regarding  those  who
decline pilot or navigator training and uphold such declinations.

The entire evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In his response to the Air Force  evaluation,  the  applicant  states
that he is requesting he be allowed to reapply for  both  Specialized
Undergraduate Pilot Training (SUPT) as well as SUNT, not SUNT  alone.
The applicant again explains the circumstances of his application  to
the Air Force Reserves and that  he  understood  the  Reserve  formal
pilot selection board to be a formality since a Reserve unit selected
him to fly with them.  The formal Reserve pilot selection  board  did
not select him because his Air Force Officer Qualifying Test  (AFOQT)
scores and Pilot Candidate Selection Method (PCSM)  scores  were  too
low.  He has since retested and raised his scores significantly.   He
has also cancelled  his  separation  and  will  not  pursue  training
through the Air Force Reserve.  He submitted a new  package  applying
for SUPT and was ranked as the number one candidate of  five  by  his
wing commander.  He has been advised that  his  new  AFOQT  and  PCSM
scores along with  his  wing  commander’s  endorsement  give  him  an
excellent chance of being selected.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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
circumstances of this case, the majority of the  Board  believes  the
applicant made reasonable decisions based on his desire to  fly.   We
also note the actions he has taken to strengthen his record in  order
to better his chances for selection for SUPT.   As  such,  the  Board
majority believes to deny him the opportunity to  be  considered  for
selection for SUPT would constitute an injustice.  Although under the
applicable AFI, applicant would normally be ineligible to  apply  for
any flying training due to declining training after  being  accepted,
in this case the applicant was motivated by  a  desire  to  become  a
pilot rather than a navigator.  It appears he  may  have  been  given
incomplete information regarding the Reserve flying  selection  board
process and thought he had a firm flying position.  As such,  in  the
interest of equity and justice, we believe he  should  be  given  the
benefit of the doubt and be given another opportunity  to  apply  for
flying training with the Air Force.  We further  note  the  applicant
has strong support from his squadron and group commanders to be given
an opportunity to apply for flying training.  Therefore, the majority
of the Board recommends  the  applicant’s  records  be  corrected  as
indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating  to  APPLICANT,  be  corrected  to  show  that  he  was  not
considered for pilot and navigator training by  the  2-5  March  2004
Active Duty Undergraduate Flying  Training  Selection  Board  and  is
eligible to apply for undergraduate flying training.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 19 January 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

      Mr. Frederick R. Beaman, III, Panel Chair
      Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member
      Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member

By majority  vote,  the  Board  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as
recommended.  Mr. Beaman voted to  deny  the  requested  relief,  but
elected not to submit a minority report.  The  following  documentary
evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Nov 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPAO, dated 15 Dec 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Dec 04.
    Exhibit E.  Memorandum, Applicant, dated 6 Jan 05.




                                   FREDERICK R. BEAMAN, III
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2004-03742


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 XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX, be corrected to show that he
was not considered for pilot and navigator training by the 2-5
March 2004 Active Duty Undergraduate Flying Training Selection
Board and is hereby eligible to apply for undergraduate flying
training.






            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency