Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02651
Original file (BC-2006-02651.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied



                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02651
            INDEX CODE:  126.03

                 COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  3 MAR 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect his prior aircraft  qualifications
and flying hours from his Army service.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes it is in the best interest of the  Air  Force  to  have  a
correct record of his qualifications and flying hours  from  his  Army
service in the event additional pilots are needed.

In support of his request, applicant provided a copy  of  Flight  Hour
Records  Summary,  Training  Certificates,  and  excerpts   from   his
Individual Flight Record.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was a former Army rated pilot who logged 832.4 hours  of
flight time in several models of Army  helicopters  between  1986  and
1993.  He entered  the  Air  Force  in  June  1998,  as  a  Diagnostic
Radiologist following a period of separation from service.

He is currently serving in the Regular  Air  Force  in  the  grade  of
major.

_________________________________________________________________


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AF/A3OT recommends denial.  A3OT  states  in  part,  IAW  AFI  11-402,
Aviation and Parachutist Service, Aeronautical Ratings and Badges,  an
officer  that  completed  flying  training  conducted  by  another  US
military service,  must  apply  for  the  basic  USAF  rating  via  an
Aeronautical  Rating  Board  (ARB),  and  must  be  assigned   to   an
operational flying position within  one  year  for  award  of  a  USAF
rating.  Since the applicant has not been awarded a USAF  aeronautical
rating, he is not part of the USAF rated aircrew inventory and is  not
managed as a USAF aircrew member.

The AF/A3OT 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
28 Sep 06, for review and comment within 30 days.  As  of  this  date,
this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 to  warrant  granting  the  relief
sought in this application.  In this respect we  note,  officers  must
apply for the basic Air Force Aeronautical rating via an ARB, and must
be assigned to an operational flying  position  within  one  year  for
award of an Air Force rating.  No evidence has been presented to  show
the applicant  applied  to  the  ARB  or  was  awarded  an  Air  Force
aeronautical  rating.   Therefore,  we  agree  with  the  opinion  and
recommendation of the office of primary responsibility and  adopt  its
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant  has  not
been the victim of an error or injustice.  In view of  the  foregoing,
and in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find  no
compelling basis to recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

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-
2006-02651 in  Executive  Session  on  20  December  2006,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member
                 Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Aug 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, HQ USAF/A3OT, dated 21 Sep 06.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Sep 06.





      MICHAEL J. NOVEL
      Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00576

    Original file (BC-2006-00576.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Air Force Instruction (AFI) 11-402, Aviation Service, Aeronautical Ratings, and Badges, specifies two criteria for the award of Navigator Wings, (1) that he be a graduate of an Advanced Navigator Training School, and (2) that he have at least 400 primary navigator hours. A3OT’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02208

    Original file (BC-2005-02208.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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

    Original file (BC-2004-01805.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01134

    Original file (BC-2006-01134.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01134 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 OCTOBER 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to include his Air Corps flight duties and the award of the Enlisted Aircrew Member badge. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02476

    Original file (BC-2012-02476.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit B. Although the applicant states that he has accumulated over 1,200 USN flight hours, his logbook reflects a total of 1146.8 hours of accumulated pilot time. In view of the above, we find the applicant has provided substantial evidence to warrant partially correcting the record to add his USN pilot time to ARMS.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03453

    Original file (BC-2006-03453.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his appeal, he has furnished copies of numerous documents corresponding with the office of Senator Bill Frist, a Medical Board Report, dated 6 December 2004, numerous medical documents from St. Thomas Hospital, The Heart Group, and his military medical records, a synopsis of his Guard Career, a Timeline, a letter of indebtedness from the 118 AW/FMFPM, dated 26 October 2005, his DD Form 214, dated 28 February 2005, SO RX-626, dated, 2 March 2003, and SO RX-368, dated 4 January...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01808

    Original file (BC 2014 01808.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Because the findings and recommendations of his FEB supported his return to aviation service, he believes the decision to permanently disqualify him from aviation service by the final approval authority, , was either improperly influenced by immunized information in the safety investigation or simply arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable. After completing action under paragraph 3.7.1.6, convene an FEB if the member's potential for continued aviation service is still in question.” On 18...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00965

    Original file (BC-2004-00965.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03247

    Original file (BC-2006-03247.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, it was revoked one month prior to her separation because she was erroneously given credit for a simulator flight by the flight records office, leaving her with 95 months of OFDA credit. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and furnished a response indicating that no single flight in the aircraft could have made up for the flight office error before her required...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02210

    Original file (BC 2014 02210.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PRB will be convened to review the trainee’s records and recommend continuing training, retraining, modify training or an FEB. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: USAF/A3O-AIF recommends denial of the applicant’s requests and states that the FEB’s final approval authority determined the applicant should be permanently disqualified from aviation service. The complete A3TK evaluation is at Exhibit G. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AMC/A3TK advisory states that there was a...