DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
BJG
Docket No: 7430-00
28 March 2001
SN
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. You requested authorization
to wear naval aircrewman (NAC) wings and hold the NAC designator.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 28 March 200 1. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your
naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board
considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated
8 January 2001, a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained
in the advisory opinion. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be
taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new
and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
In this
records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
IWTEDRITY DRIVE
MILLINDTON TN
28055-0000
5720
08 JAN 01
MEMORANDUM FOR PERS-OOZCB
1. After a review of all available data, it is evident
that not all information relevant to the case of
e record does not contain
ontained in
enclosur
e disputed action too
AWAN attached to VS-41 and he was recommended
(l), reflects a NJP that
the forwarded file does however provide s
Aircrew status.
2. In January of 1989, the member was an
for advancement to A W3 .The member ’s page-9, contained in enclosure
occurred in April of 1989 and in March of 1990 the member
still attached to VS-41. In June of 1990, the member detached VS-41 as an Airman and checked
aboard USS Forrestal (CV-59) where he struck for the ABH rating. Enclosure (1) contains a
copy of the November 11, 1991 flight physical. It was this physical which found the member,
“physically qualified but not aeronautically adaptable for duty involving flying as Air
Crew. ” The same physical also states member
involving flying as Air Crew dtd 1 Mar 90. NAVPERS
14 10240, BUPERSINST 1326.4. Hx of interpersonal and advancement difficulties.
“Voluntarily terminated himself from duty
1070/613 enclosed. BUPERSMAN Art.
”
’s rate was changed to Airman while
-
9OJAN3 1; it was
record is missing an evaluation for the period 89FEB0 1
eriod the NJP occurred. Enclosure (1) contains an evaluation dated 89FEB0
89JUN18, however the dates on the years have been written over in pen ink to reflect the year
1990. Finally, enclosure (1) does not contain a copy of the page 13 referred to in the flight
physical. The flight physical refers to the page 13 as a record of the member
action that would have resulted in a revocation.
4. From the limited documentation provided it appears quite evi
volunteered from the Aircrew program as an
signe
resulted in an Aircrew revocation and at a later date was found physically qualified but not
aeronautically adaptable.
AWAN . He
l-
’s non-volunteer
A ss wents
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-03394
Aeronautical orders are not related to travel orders and would have been required in addition to the travel orders. Members who are properly qualified and directed to perform specific inflight duties, not on a frequent and regular basis, may be ordered to do so using a flight authorization. AFR 60-13, paragraph 7-5 states Nonrated officers are authorized to wear the officer aircrew member badge while assigned to and performing aircrew duties in a designated MSL position identified by a G,...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00612
Attained at least 150 hours of flying duty as an The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: USAF/A3O-AIF recommends denial of the applicant’s request for the Aircrew Member and Flight Engineer Badges indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. We note...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03063
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Although he was on flying status for ten years, orders awarding him the Enlisted Aircrew Badge were never issued. The applicant does not provide flying status documentation or aeronautical orders qualifying him for an Aircrew Member Badge. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00092
Airmen crew members will be placed on indefinite flying status as long as they satisfactorily perform their duties, remain physically qualified, are assigned to an authorized Unit Manning Document (UMD) aircrew position (identified by the prefix "A") which requires duties as a crew member and participate in frequent and regular aerial flights. Lastly, he requests the Board review the uniqueness of the flying requirements of his AFSC in the T-29 Aircraft, and grant him the Air Force Crew...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02610
_______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants requests for the VSM, RVGC w/P, PUC, VCM, KSM, NATO Medal, Cold War Medal, AFOR-L and AFOR-S. DPSID was unable to locate any documentation in the applicants records verifying he served in Vietnam or an area of eligibility for award of the VSM, RVGC w/P or VCM. In regards to the list of medals and unit awards, he was seeking help in finding out whether any...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02004
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02004 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 Oct 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect his entitlement to the NCO Professional Military Education (NCO PME) Graduate Ribbon and flight crew status. XOOT indicates that the applicant’s military...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02639
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. According to the applicant's statement, he was a member of the Air Force Reserve for about 3 years and 3 months. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 14 Feb 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01808
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...
The applicant's requested effective dates were considered; however, since the orders submitted by his former classmate provide a key piece of concrete evidence substantiating some of his claims, we believe we should be guided by these documents. 37, the classmate was awarded flight status effective 9 May 56. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be...