RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01740
            INDEX CODE:  102.01

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) be waived.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was medically disqualified from flying and requested  a  waiver  to
return to flying status that was  subsequently  denied.   He  has  now
cross flowed into the contracting career field and would like to  have
the option to cross into federal civil service contracting should that
opportunity arise.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has  provided  copies  of  his
ADSC application and his medical disqualification from flying status.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant attended and completed Joint Specialized Undergraduate Pilot
Training (JSUPT) on 12 December 2001.   He  subsequently  went  on  to
complete advance C-17 flying training on 27 March  2002.  On  21  July
2003, he self-referred to the mental health clinic for a  reported  6-
month history of depressive symptoms.  He was evaluated by Life Skills
staff and was released with no diagnosis.  On 6 October 2003, he again
self-referred to the  mental  health  clinic  complaining  of  general
unhappiness,   fatigue,   difficulty   concentrating   and   accessing
information needed to complete his job.  His heart was not in his job.
  He  was  referred  for  psychological  testing  and  was  eventually
diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder.  On 27 October 2003, he  was
placed on antidepressants.  On 10 December 2003,  he  was  permanently
decertified from the Personnel Reliability  Program  (PRP).   He  also
complained of a similar depressive episode  during  1995  while  on  a
religious assignment with the Latter Day Saints.  On 18 December 2003,
he requested to be taken off the antidepressants  as  he  was  feeling
better.   However,  he  did  request  to  be  transferred  to  another
airframe.   Upon  retesting,  his  diagnosis  was  changed   to   full
remission.  He applied for a waiver  in  order  to  return  to  flight
status on the basis he was not taking any medications and has remained
asymptomatic for seven months.  He  was  evaluated  by  the  Aerospace
Medicine Consultation Service and was found not to  meet  the  medical
standards  for  flying  class  II  duties.   It  was  determined   the
likelihood of recurrent depression in the USAF  operation  environment
is quite high.  On 28 October 2004 his waiver  was  denied  and  on  2
November 2004 he was permanently disqualified from flying status.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPF recommends denial.  DPF notes Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-
2107, Active Duty Service Commitments (ADSCs), states JSUPT  incurs  a
10-year active duty commitment.   Applicant’s  ADSC  date  is  now  11
December 2011.  DPF states while the applicant is not flying,  he  has
received the training.  Even though the Air Force is not utilizing him
as a pilot, they are receiving a return on their investment  just  the
same.   DPF  states  the  applicant  has   not   provided   sufficient
justification to support his request.

DPF’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He contends he accepted a 10-year ADSC  under  the  premise  he  would
complete the flying program and be utilized as a  pilot.   Upon  being
disqualified from the flying program, he  feels  the  ADSC  should  be
waived as the Air Force can no longer benefit from his  training.   He
feels since the antidepressant’s seemed not to work for him,  he  must
be suffering instead from chronic fatigue syndrome  (CFS).   His  plan
was not to return to the C-17 program but to join the Unmanned  Aerial
Vehicle (UAV) program.  As he was found permanently disqualified  from
flying, he could not be accepted for that program.   He  is  not  ever
aware of being treated for CFS and notes symptoms for  both  disorders
are similar.

He is happy with the stable lifestyle of  the  contracting  profession
which has increased  his  ability  to  stay  physically  and  mentally
healthy.  However, he contends that while he is  still  beneficial  to
the Air Force, his flight experience is nothing  more  than  something
nice to talk about.  He contends the Air Force is letting  people  out
in order to reduce its officer end-strength while the civil service is
undermanned in contracting and facing more retirements in the next few
years.  Once he finishes his two  year  Permanent  Change  of  Station
(PCS) commitment, he would like to have the opportunity to  apply  for
one of the vacant contracting positions.  He has made every effort  to
employ his flying training and would still  fly  today  if  he  could,
including UAV’s.  If the Air Force values his current  training,  they
would approve his waiver and  allow  him  the  opportunity  to  better
support the Air Force/government in his new career field.

Applicant’s response 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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the  existence  of  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, the majority  of  the  Board  agrees  with  the  opinion  and
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary  responsibility  and
adopts its  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our  conclusion  that  the
applicant has not been the victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.   The
applicant signed a contract and whether he serves as a pilot or  as  a
contractor, a majority of the Board feels that  he  should  honor  the
contract, and that he is still providing a return on the  Air  Force’s
original investment.  Therefore, in the absence  of  evidence  to  the
contrary, the majority of the  Board  finds  no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the  panel  finds  insufficient  evidence  of  error  or
injustice and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-01740 in Executive Session on 9 August 2005, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
      Mr. Richard K. Hartley, Member
      Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member

By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny the request.  Mr.  Hartley
voted to correct the record but does not wish  to  submit  a  minority
report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:








    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 May 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPF, dated 9 Jun 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jun 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 29 Jun 05.




                                   LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                   Panel Chair