RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01004
		INDEX NUMBER:  111.05

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Weapons school Training Report, AF Form 475, rendered for the period 6 July 1998 through 9 October 1998, be voided and removed from his record.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The training report contains several errors, misstatements and omissions.  

1.  Section I, Block 4, lists his Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) as W12B3C.  Graduation from Weapons School is a prerequisite for the W prefix.  Since he did not graduate, he never received or held the W prefix DAFSC.  At the time of elimination, his DAFSC was K12B3C.

2.  Section II, Block 4, states he was “Eliminated for Flying Deficiency.”  His elimination was due to a family emergency beyond his control.  His elimination occurred within one day of returning from 10 days of emergency leave.  His former deputy commander of the B-1 Weapons School Division provided a letter that documents the circumstances that led to his elimination.

3.  Section II, Block 4, states he “failed to meet course standards in the Surface Attack (SA) phase” of training.  His elimination occurred during the Surface Attack Tactics (SAT) phase.  Since his elimination occurred during this later phase of training, the report unjustly documents that he was eliminated during an earlier and less difficult phase of training.  (This contention actually refers to Section III, paragraph 3.)

4.  He realizes that a report is not erroneous or unfair because it is inconsistent with prior or subsequent evaluations.  However, in an attempt to prove he has never had a flying deficiency before, during or after Weapons School, and that his elimination actually occurred because of a family emergency, he includes several flying-related documents.  He was an outstanding graduate for the Central Flight Instructor Course and a distinguished graduate for the B-1 Defensive Systems Course.  He received qualified ratings for all of his checkrides and three exceptionally qualified endorsements, including an exceptionally qualified endorsement by Headquarters 8th Air Force during their most recent inspection of the 28th Bomb Wing.

During Operation Allied Force (OAF), he was selected to lead his squadron in combat by flying the first B-1 combat mission of OAF.  He flew the most combat missions of any B-1 Weapon Systems Officer during the conflict, and was awarded the General Ira C. Eaker Award for “Outstanding Feat of Military Airmanship within 8th Air Force.”

The applicant’s complete submission, which includes 7 attachments, is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System (PDS) indicates that the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of major, having been promoted to that grade, effective 1 January 2001.

Applicant's OPR profile for the last 10 reporting periods follows:

	PERIOD ENDING	EVALUATION

	10 Nov 93	Meets Standards
	12 Dec 94	Meets Standards
	12 Dec 95	Meets Standards
	31 Oct 96	Meets Standards
	13 Dec 96	Training Report
	29 Dec 97	Meets Standards
   *  9 Oct 98	Training Report
	29 Dec 98	Meets Standards
	 1 Nov 99	Meets Standards
	 1 Sep 00	Meets Standards

*_Contested Report -- Eliminated for Flying Deficiency
___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The Chief, Promotion, Evaluation, and Recognition Division, AFPC/DPPP, recommended denial of the applicant’s request to void the training report closing 9 October 1998.  The applicant did not provide documentation from the rater that his elimination occurred during the Surface Attack Tactics phase of training rather than the Surface Attack phase.  The former deputy commander of the B-1 Weapons School Division provided a statement documenting the circumstances that led to the applicant’s elimination.  He believes it would be in the best interest of both the Air Force and the applicant to remove the training report; however, he was not the applicant’s evaluator.  AFPC/DPPP contacted the former rater to verify the reason for elimination on the training report.  The rater disagreed with the applicant’s contention that he was not deficient in flying and stated, “The training report was accurate when written and remains a true statement of the applicant’s abilities.  He did not meet the flying proficiency standards of the USAF Weapons School and his training report is an accurate reflection of that fact.”

The AFPC/DPPP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The Chief, B-2/B-52 Bomber Assignment, AFPC/DPAOC, stated that the DAFSC should be corrected to read Q12B3C on the training report.  

Regarding the phase of elimination, while the class had progressed to the Surface Attack Tactics (SAT) phase, the applicant’s first flight after rejoining the class was his Surface Attack (SA) phase progress check.  Since he failed this evaluation, he never satisfactorily completed the SA phase of training.  Therefore, the training report is correct in stating that he failed to meet course standards in the Surface Attack (SA) phase and no change is warranted.

The AFPC/DPAOC evaluation is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant maintains that the Operations Officer of the B-1 Weapons School Division is a credible source in support of his application and was in the best position to describe the circumstances that led to his elimination.  He reiterates his contention that he had extenuating circumstances in terms of a family emergency that caused him to fall behind syllabus requirements (Exhibit F-1).  

The applicant maintains that he was eliminated during the Surface Attack Tactics (SAT) phase of training and that the Operations Officer of the B-1 Weapons School and the evaluator who flew the SAT progress check with him is in a much better position to confirm this fact than the current Assistant Deputy of Operations (ADO) at the B-1 Weapons School.  The applicant agrees with AFPC/DPAOC that the DAFSC on the training report should be Q12B3C (Exhibit F-2).

___________________________________________________________________

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 a probable injustice warranting partial relief of the applicant’s request.  On reaching this conclusion, we considered the following:  

	a.  With respect to the applicant’s request that his DAFSC be corrected, the Air Force office of primary responsibility stated that source documentation, which included his OPR for the period 30 December 1997 through 29 December 1998, and the duty title history entries effective 1 October 1997 and 1 October 1998, indicates that the DAFSC should be Q12B3C.  We agree and the applicant also agrees.

	b.  Regarding the applicant’s contention that the reason for elimination on his Education/Training Report is inaccurate, although the reason may be partially accurate, it fails to take into consideration that the errors took place on the day following his return from family emergency leave.  In our view, the applicant was in no condition to resume training and was probably still distracted by the circumstances of his emergency leave.  While we are not inclined to remove the report because it documents the reason the course was not completed, we recommend that it be changed to more accurately reflect the circumstances that led to his elimination.

4.  Turning now to the applicant’s contention that he failed to meet course standards in a later phase of training; i.e., the Surface Attack Tactics (SAT) phase rather than the earlier, less difficult phase of training; i.e., the Surface Attack (SA) phase.  We noted the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of this contention; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendation of the office of primary responsibility, HQ AFPC/DPAOC, and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the SAT phase of training was the more accurate phase of elimination.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend favorable action on the applicant’s request to change the phase of training on the report. 

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the AF Form 475, Education/Training Report, rendered for the period 6 July 1998 through 9 October 1998, be amended as follows:

	a.  Section I, Item 4, DAFSC, be corrected to read “Q12B3C.”

	b.  Section II, Report Data, Item 4, DG Award Criteria/Course Noncompletion Reason, be amended to read, “Eliminated for Flying Deficiency (See Comments Section). 

	c.  Section III, Comments (Mandatory), Academic/Training Accomplishments, be amended by adding at the beginning of the section the following sentence, “APPLICANT had a family emergency requiring 10 days of emergency leave.  The stress and loss of training time resulted in his elimination.”

___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 26 July 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair
Member
Member

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Mar 2001, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPP, dated 30 Apr 2001.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPAOC, dated 20 Jun 2001.
   Exhibit E.  Letters, SAF/MIBR, dated 18 May and 29 Jun 2001.
   Exhibit F.  Letters, Applicant, dated 23 May and 6 Jul 2001, 
	w/atch.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR 01-01004

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, be corrected to show that the AF Form 475, Education/Training Report, rendered for the period 6 July 1998 through 9 October 1998, be, and hereby is, amended as follows:

		a.  Section I, Item 4, DAFSC, be corrected to read “Q12B3C.”

		b.  Section II, Report Data, Item 4, DG Award Criteria/Course Noncompletion Reason, be amended to read, “Eliminated for Flying Deficiency (See Comments Section). 

		c.  Section III, Comments (Mandatory), Academic/Training Accomplishments, be amended by adding at the beginning of the section the following sentence, “APPLICANT had a family emergency requiring 10 days of emergency leave.  The stress and loss of training time resulted in his elimination.”

		
		Director
		Air Force Review Boards Agency