RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00293
		INDEX CODE:  

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be granted an Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) slot.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was given incorrect guidance when it came time to apply for pilot candidacy.  He was informed that because his eyes do not meet the initial vision requirements for pilot training, he could not apply for pilot candidacy.  The cadre instead instructed him to apply for navigator candidacy.  He has since been informed that the correct procedure would have been to apply for a pilot slot.

For receiving incorrect counseling from his AFROTC cadre during the application process for possible pilot candidacy, he requests that his records be brought before the next pilot candidacy board.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement, a statement from the Commander of AFROTC Det 880, a copy of his Flying Class 1A Physical documents, a copy of an e-mail from the Chief, Physical Standards AF Medical Operations Agency, stating that he was granted an FC I waiver to qualify for UPT, and a statement from the Commander of 436 Operations Support Squadron, recommending applicant for UPT.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of 2d Lieutenant.

The applicant met the ROTC Potential Pilot Qualified (PPQ)/Potential Navigator Qualified (PNQ) categorization board in March 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AETC/SGPS states that PPQ and PNQ are special selection boards held by HQ ROTC/RR to select those that by their ROTC entry physicals, could potentially be qualified for UPT or UNT.  HQ ROTC/RR then determines the number of seats they have for each category, racks and stacks them based on grades, Det CC recommendation and other non-medical ROTC criteria, and if selected the individual is then scheduled for a Flying Class 1 or 1A examination.  This process keeps the AF treatment facilities from doing up to 1500 physicals for approximately 500 UPT seats.  This selection process has been in effect for many years and has worked exceptionally well.  All those in ROTC are aware that there are no waivers for the PPQ categorization review, one must be fully qualified or they will be disqualified.  This is because any vision disqualifications for flying could only be overturned by an Exception to Policy (ETP) granted by the Air Force Chief of Staff.  There were no medical waivers or ETPs authorized.  Based on these criteria applicant was selected for UNT, due to his vision, he was not qualified for UPT.

In April 2002 waiver authority was delegated to HQ AFMOA/SGZA to the same criteria that the AF CC used to grant ETPs.  It appears that the applicant’s file was submitted to HQ AFMOA/SGZA and in December 2002, he was granted a waiver for UPT.

Under the review and certification system that was in place at the time of the applicant’s initial PPQ/PNQ review, he was found not qualified for PPQ and qualified for PNQ.  There were no policy or review errors made on the part of HQ ROTC/RR or HQ AETC/SGPS in this selection process.

Therefore, while they do support the applicant’s request to reapply for UPT, they do not feel he should be considered ahead of the other UPT applicants.  All the processing of the applicant’s case was done according to procedure and based on documentation submitted at the time of the review.  The applicant should be aware that if accepted for UPT he will undergo a full and complete ophthalmology evaluation during MFS at Brooks AFB, TX, which will include full vision studies.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPAO states that based on the procedures in place at the time Det 880 forwarded the eligible pilot candidates to HQ ROTC, then, applicant did not meet the pilot medical standards.

In a memorandum dated 15 January 2003, the Det 880 Commander stated his belief that applicant, if he had been medically qualified, would have obtained a pilot slot.  When the applicant reported for active duty in the Air Force on 15 May 2002 he was not medically qualified and remained unqualified until          16 December 2002, 7 months after his commissioning date.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 7 March 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 injustice.  After reviewing the evidence of record, the majority of the Board is persuaded that the applicant should have another opportunity to compete for entry into UPT.  It appears that shortly after the applicant was considered and not selected for enrollment in UPT, there was a change in policy pertaining to waivers by which the applicant may have been allowed to compete for entry into UPT.  In view of the potential benefit to the Air Force, the applicant’s desire to serve as a pilot, and the supportive statement from his commander, the Board majority believes it would be in the best interests of the service if he was again given the opportunity to compete for enrollment in UPT.  The Board majority does not favor the applicant be automatically given a UPT slot based on the circumstances of his case, i.e., that the actions taken in March 2003 were not erroneous, and the uncertainty as to the outcome.  Therefore, in the interest of justice, the majority recommends his records be brought before the next pilot candidacy board and he be allowed to compete for a UPT slot.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he is given the opportunity to compete for a Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) slot by reapplying and having his records brought before the next pilot candidacy board.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application, BC-2003-00293, in Executive Session on 28 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		Panel Chair
		Member
		Member

By a majority vote, the Board voted to correct the records, as recommended.  Mr. Russell voted to deny applicant's request, but does not desire to submit a Minority Report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Jan 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AETC/SGPS, dated 18 Feb 03.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPAO, dated 3 Mar 03.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Mar 03.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-00293
INDEX CODE:  100.07

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 he is given the opportunity to compete for an Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) slot by reapplying and having his records brought before the next pilot candidacy board.

					
					Director
					Air Force Review Boards Agency