RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01981
		INDEX CODE:  115.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  The Flight Evaluation Board (FEB) decision be overturned and all evidence of the FEB be expunged from his records. 

2.  His wings be reinstated.

3.  He meet a promotion board and have the opportunity to find an Air Force Reserve or Air National Guard position.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He recently joined the Iowa Army National Guard as a prospective Med-Evac pilot.  He thought up until a month ago that he would be able to fly in the Army because the FEB results were specifically in regard to Air Force flying.  He had over 12 years experience flying in the Army without any problems.  His Army unit has been given a deployment date and is relatively new to the Med-Evac mission.  He has more time in the UH-60 than 90% of the pilots.  

The FEB was based on a single failed instrument check ride.  All the retraining that was accomplished was either incomplete for various reasons, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory when the training flight was given to the Director of Training.  His unit commander tried everything possible to remove him from the Squadron.  He admits he did not study for the Instrument Qualification check ride.  He passed the retest and the Tactical check ride.  He is currently an Emergency Medical Service (EMS) helicopter pilot.  He has taken several check rides and has learned to fly five additional types of helicopters.  He has been flying safely and successfully in a variety of different situations and takes an FAA instrument check ride twice a year.  

In support of his request, applicant provides a personal statement, initial training records, documents associated with his suspension from aviation duties and documents associated with the FEB action.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Records reflect the applicant served in an enlisted and officer (aviation service) status in the Army Reserve from 23 November 1983 until 6 May 1999, when his request for an interservice transfer was approved.  Prior to his transfer, the applicant was serving as a Petroleum Platoon Leader.  

On 7 May 1999, the applicant was appointed a captain, Reserve of the Air Force and awarded the USAF pilot rating (helicopter only).  The applicant’s record contains three AF Forms 707B, Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) beginning with the rating period 7 May 1999 and ending 6 May 2002.  The reports ending 6 May 2000 and 6 May 2001 contain overall ratings of “Meets Standards.”  The report ending 6 May 2002 was a referral report.  On 19 November 2002, the applicant met an FEB for unsatisfactory flight performance and excessive training.  Effective 28 February 2004, the applicant was assigned to the Non-obligated Reserve Section.  He is currently serving in the Army National Guard.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFRC/JA recommends denial.  JA states that the applicant’s contention that his disqualification from aviation service was based on a “single failed instrument ride” is incorrect.  The overwhelming documentary evidence and witness testimony presented to the FEB demonstrated that his flying skills were erratic and deficient, he possessed poor situational awareness, had difficulty with instrument flying, committed repeated mistakes and gross errors, and required special training and additional flights.  JA advises that the FEB board was conducted in accordance with the governing directive and there is no basis or reason to conclude the board should be reconvened to consider additional evidence; or, that a new board is necessary based on any allegation of fraud, collusion, or incorrect judgment on the part of the board members.  The AFRC/JA complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The AFRC/A2A3 recommends denial.  A2A3 states that the applicant’s commander lost total confidence in his ability to safely perform pilot duties; therefore, it was determined that he be disqualified due to his demonstrated lack of basic instrument flying skills, difficulty in a multitask environment and inability to proficiently and safely perform the critical skills required to fly an Air Force aircraft.  The AFRC/A2A3 complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Applicant provided a response addressing the points made by the advisories and adds that the statement regarding his flying skills and that he is a danger to himself and others is totally unfounded.  He has been flying EMS single pilot missions for the last 3 years.  He flies with a crew of two or three and has had no incidents or accidents.  He is current and qualified in two different aircraft and takes two instrument check rides every year.  The applicant’s complete letter is at Exhibit F.  

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice.  After carefully reviewing the evidence before us, we are not persuaded that the FEBs’ decision should be overturned or that the FEB action should be expunged from his records.  In our opinion, the applicant’s disqualification from aviation service was neither contrary to the provisions of the governing instruction nor unjust.  Absent strong evidence to the contrary, we are more inclined to give deference to those authorities vested with the duties of determining whether an individual meets the demanding requirements of flying Air Force aircraft.  We noted the arguments of the applicant; however, they have not persuaded us that his opportunity to complete pilot training was unjustly hampered by unfair practices by his unit commander, as he contends.  A review of the applicant’s flight training records by competent authorities appears to have revealed a history of systemic problems and poor performance, resulting in his commander losing confidence in his ability to safely perform the required pilot duties.  Other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence substantiating his claim that he was treated unfairly.  In the absence of evidence showing that the information contained in the FEB is erroneous or that his substantial rights were violated, we agree with the detailed assessment of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and find that the applicant has not substantiated his burden of proof that his disqualification from aviation service was either in error or unjust.  Accordingly, this application is not favorably considered.  

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number BC-2007-01981 in Executive Session on 11 October 2007 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2007-01981 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 June 2007, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/A3, dated 9 August 2007.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFRC/A2A3, dated 20 August 2007, w/atch.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 August 2007.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 26 August 2007.