2026 ACTIVE DUTY UFT BOARD

[bsTHUD]

Curious what everyone’s thoughts are on the new AF215 format? It seems like plenty of space for rater and senior rater comments, but once you get going you quickly realize that not much fits compared to year’s past when the comments were narrative bullets or old school bullet format. Also, there’s a new section for applicant comments (block 19) that wasn’t on last year’s AF215. The font size is super small so it almost seems like block 19 was never meant to be there. What type of info are others including that isn’t captured in your personal statement or elsewhere in your package? 

Completely feel this. Wasn't sure what narrative statements held the most weight on the 215 specifically. It was tough cutting fat on statements i felt were strong. Relied heavily on my personal letter and letter of rec to capture other things that weren't captured on the 215. I also left block 19 blank. Like you said, it seemed as if it shouldn't be there. Last years 215 i saw from previous applicants had a number 19. Remarks but no box to write in. But my 215 was due to the squadron yesterday so it's in gods hands now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LawnmowerofDoom]

New 36-2139 dropped 1 July 2025, UFT page on Air Force portal updated with new ADSC statement template

[rparsonsr2]

2 hours ago, LawnmowerofDoom said:

New 36-2139 dropped 1 July 2025, UFT page on Air Force portal updated with new ADSC statement template

Classic, complete packages were due to our DCO (group) on the 30th… guess I’ll reach out to them since I doubt they’re tracking this 😕 thanks for the heads up!

[kp24]

On 6/28/2025 at 7:28 PM, bsTHUD said:

Completely feel this. Wasn't sure what narrative statements held the most weight on the 215 specifically. It was tough cutting fat on statements i felt were strong. Relied heavily on my personal letter and letter of rec to capture other things that weren't captured on the 215. I also left block 19 blank. Like you said, it seemed as if it shouldn't be there. Last years 215 i saw from previous applicants had a number 19. Remarks but no box to write in. But my 215 was due to the squadron yesterday so it's in gods hands now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, I ended up leaving it blank. Everything is turned into the Wing, so we'll see how it plays out! 

How long did it take you to get your IFC1 certified (pending MFS, I'm assuming)? I'm also currently deployed and got the run around from the deployed EMDS, which was super frustrating seeing as I'm currently medical, but I digress. I ended up going to Ramstein a few weeks ago and getting it knocked out. Hoping it comes back quickly since I shouldn't require any waivers. It sounds like the board is a little more flexible with deployed members in terms of expecting their IFC1 to be certified prior to the board suspense, but I don't want to push it too much. 

[rparsonsr2]

38 minutes ago, kp24 said:

Yeah, I ended up leaving it blank. Everything is turned into the Wing, so we'll see how it plays out! 

How long did it take you to get your IFC1 certified (pending MFS, I'm assuming)? I'm also currently deployed and got the run around from the deployed EMDS, which was super frustrating seeing as I'm currently medical, but I digress. I ended up going to Ramstein a few weeks ago and getting it knocked out. Hoping it comes back quickly since I shouldn't require any waivers. It sounds like the board is a little more flexible with deployed members in terms of expecting their IFC1 to be certified prior to the board suspense, but I don't want to push it too much. 

From start to finish, mine took 7 weeks (with a waiver required) Luckily leadership at my SQ helped make things happen. If able, sit down with leadership and probe the possibility of expediting things. SQ CCs have connections and the ability to call people most others cannot. I made the mistake of calling HQ and it almost ended badly so do not follow directly in my foot steps... that said, the squeaky wheel often gets greased. 

 

As for your personal statement on the AF215... there is a high probability that your wing commander has not seen your package yet. If I were in your position I would ask my SQ execs to call over to the DCO/GP/WG execs to see if there is an option to modify your form. It is my assumption that the Pilot Board takes everything into consideration; a blank white box that gives you the freedom to express your intent or display your acumen may come off as you not caring or a lack of SA on the paperwork. 

Edited July 24 by rparsonsr2

[bsTHUD]

Yeah, I ended up leaving it blank. Everything is turned into the Wing, so we'll see how it plays out! 
How long did it take you to get your IFC1 certified (pending MFS, I'm assuming)? I'm also currently deployed and got the run around from the deployed EMDS, which was super frustrating seeing as I'm currently medical, but I digress. I ended up going to Ramstein a few weeks ago and getting it knocked out. Hoping it comes back quickly since I shouldn't require any waivers. It sounds like the board is a little more flexible with deployed members in terms of expecting their IFC1 to be certified prior to the board suspense, but I don't want to push it too much. 

My first FC1-related appt was lab work back in April, a few days ago i got the approved FC1 with "pending MFS" like you mentioned. I don't know all so now im questioning if that means i have to go back to Wright Pat? Anyone know? As for the blank box like Parsons mentioned, i can see it being additional space to write things but i opted not to based on last years 215 where the blank box was actually where we put our name like box 19 states. Seems like a clerical error and i dont want to portray to AFPC that i didnt have enough room to fit everything so i found extra space to include a bit more. Apples to apples i guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kp24]

7 hours ago, rparsonsr2 said:

From start to finish, mine took 7 weeks (with a waiver required) Luckily leadership at my SQ helped make things happen. If able, sit down with leadership and probe the possibility of expediting things. SQ CCs have connections and the ability to call people most others cannot. I made the mistake of calling HQ and it almost ended badly so do not follow directly in my foot steps... that said, the squeaky wheel often gets greased. 

 

As for your personal statement on the AF215... there is a high probability that your wing commander has not seen your package yet. If I were in your position I would ask my SQ execs to call over to the DCO/GP/WG execs to see if there is an option to modify your form. It is my assumption that the Pilot Board takes everything into consideration; a blank white box that gives you the freedom to express your intent or display your acumen may come off as you not caring or a lack of SA on the paperwork. 

Thanks for the info! I’ll give it another few days and then start reaching out. That said, the board said I should be fine as long as it’s certified pending MFS prior to October. If I’m waiverless and it takes that long… 🥴

I spoke to our Wing execs yesterday and they said leaving box 19 empty was fine and it seemed more like a place to explain if you had hours that weren’t accounted for in your PCSM or something along those lines. We’ll see what happens I guess! 

6 hours ago, bsTHUD said:

My first FC1-related appt was lab work back in April, a few days ago i got the approved FC1 with "pending MFS" like you mentioned. I don't know all so now im questioning if that means i have to go back to Wright Pat? Anyone know? As for the blank box like Parsons mentioned, i can see it being additional space to write things but i opted not to based on last years 215 where the blank box was actually where we put our name like box 19 states. Seems like a clerical error and i dont want to portray to AFPC that i didnt have enough room to fit everything so i found extra space to include a bit more. Apples to apples i guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You should be all set as long as it says certified pending MFS. The MFS you’ll go TDY to Wright Pat for if (when) you’re selected. 
 

Best of luck to you both!

[kp24]

For anyone who might still be waiting on their IFC to be certified by AFAC, mine was submitted on Thursday and stamped “approved pending MFS” on Friday. Granted, I did not require any waivers, but it was a super quick turnaround! 

[JASSM_ER]

Hey everyone, I'm a new applicant looking for a reality check with my package. I'm not sure whether to be optimistic or not and I'd like help setting my own expectations for the board. 

Graduated last year from AFROTC with a technical degree, 3.29 GPA

Straight to AFIT where I'm getting a graduate certificate (not a master's), 3.2-3ish GPA, no DG program, no education ADSC

94 Pilot AFOQT, 99 PCSM, Private Pilot License (finished while in grad school), fully qualified medical, decent extracurriculars 

I went straight to AFIT from AFROTC, so I have no operational experience. My mentor who wrote my letter of recommendation (O-6 fighter pilot) and I tried to leverage my leadership experiences from AFROTC to make up the deficiency in this category, but obviously that's not going to compare to a deployment, exec experience, etc. I'm really hoping for ENJJPT, but realistically I'm doubtful about getting selected at all. Thoughts?

[LawnmowerofDoom]

Honestly it's anybody guess what the board is looking for. I imagine there has to be some sort of expectations based on rank. Not sure a senior captain with all the boxes for major is comparable to an lt when getting selected but the board has taken both. 

I'm 99p/99pcsm no ppl but did IFT as an RPA guy. 100 pt test 4.0 MBA from a small private school (applied to OTS while in grad school). Have a 6 month "combat" deployment and letter of rec is my 04 deployment commander. 

I was 4/4 in my squadron so dont know if I even made it past the group. Coming out of existing rated I'm just hoping I make it to the board as my wing typically has double digit applicants and they have gates up to limit those from trying to crosstrain. The rumorint was if you're scores arent in the 90s dont bother. 

[Arkbird]

10 hours ago, LawnmowerofDoom said:

Honestly it's anybody guess what the board is looking for. I imagine there has to be some sort of expectations based on rank. Not sure a senior captain with all the boxes for major is comparable to an lt when getting selected but the board has taken both. 

I'm 99p/99pcsm no ppl but did IFT as an RPA guy. 100 pt test 4.0 MBA from a small private school (applied to OTS while in grad school). Have a 6 month "combat" deployment and letter of rec is my 04 deployment commander. 

I was 4/4 in my squadron so dont know if I even made it past the group. Coming out of existing rated I'm just hoping I make it to the board as my wing typically has double digit applicants and they have gates up to limit those from trying to crosstrain. The rumorint was if you're scores arent in the 90s dont bother. 

432d used to have a policy of if your pcsm score wasn't 80 or higher, you wouldn't be able to apply. The year I applied they didn't have that so it's always hit or miss depending on the year and wing CC. 

[JASSM_ER]

10 hours ago, LawnmowerofDoom said:

Honestly it's anybody guess what the board is looking for. I imagine there has to be some sort of expectations based on rank. Not sure a senior captain with all the boxes for major is comparable to an lt when getting selected but the board has taken both. 

I'm 99p/99pcsm no ppl but did IFT as an RPA guy. 100 pt test 4.0 MBA from a small private school (applied to OTS while in grad school). Have a 6 month "combat" deployment and letter of rec is my 04 deployment commander. 

I was 4/4 in my squadron so dont know if I even made it past the group. Coming out of existing rated I'm just hoping I make it to the board as my wing typically has double digit applicants and they have gates up to limit those from trying to crosstrain. The rumorint was if you're scores arent in the 90s dont bother. 

Holy crap that's competitive. Good luck man, sounds like if you can get past your unit's filters you're in a good spot with the board. 

[kp24]

16 hours ago, JASSM_ER said:

Hey everyone, I'm a new applicant looking for a reality check with my package. I'm not sure whether to be optimistic or not and I'd like help setting my own expectations for the board. 

Graduated last year from AFROTC with a technical degree, 3.29 GPA

Straight to AFIT where I'm getting a graduate certificate (not a master's), 3.2-3ish GPA, no DG program, no education ADSC

94 Pilot AFOQT, 99 PCSM, Private Pilot License (finished while in grad school), fully qualified medical, decent extracurriculars 

I went straight to AFIT from AFROTC, so I have no operational experience. My mentor who wrote my letter of recommendation (O-6 fighter pilot) and I tried to leverage my leadership experiences from AFROTC to make up the deficiency in this category, but obviously that's not going to compare to a deployment, exec experience, etc. I'm really hoping for ENJJPT, but realistically I'm doubtful about getting selected at all. Thoughts?

Your stats are great! I really can’t offer much advice, because it feels like a crapshoot based on my conversations with prior applicants (selects and non-selects).

If it makes you feel any better, I’m sitting at a 99 pilot, 68 PCSM (no flying hours and currently deployed so I couldn’t do much about flying hours for this year), 3.4 GPA w/ a MBA. Chose not to pursue ENJJPT because of my lower PCSM and I have no desire to track fighters/bombers. Not sure what my Wing ranking was, but last I heard there were only a couple of applicants from my base, which is shocking because usually there’s 10+.

Hopefully it’s a 100 slot year again! Sounds like USAFA Class of ‘26 was given about 110 more pilot slots than Class of ‘25, if there’s any correlation whatsoever. 

[bsTHUD]

Bringing it to everyone's attention: ensure your Sq, Gp, and Wg are tracking the boards selection criteria. You can find their criteria if you go on the AF Portal, type in UFT, then hit the first link that brings up the PSDM, scroll down where people are asking questions and read through to find the % breakdown. I believe it's 40% leadership, 30% potential, and 30% aptitude/PCSM scores as they state they are looking for the "whole-person concept." I just found this out the hard way from my Gp stating "he has good stuff but his scores were lower than his competitors." This implied that the Gp doesn't rack and stack, they simply push packages up to the Wg but still put them in some sort of competitive order. This is coming from a guy who has a 93 pilot and 84 pcsm, recently was an LNO and forward deployed from that gig, numerous international and diplomatic ties, first-ever ACE coordination, with 1,000+ flying hours in the RPA community and plenty of combat experience PLUS a 3-star letter of rec and I was still put 3/3 at the Gp. That being said, i am pushing a screenshot of the Board's selection criteria breakdown up to the Wg to ensure they are tracking the % breakdown and not racking/stacking solely off of PCSM like the Gp stated, "the Wg will rack and stack based on PCSM scores like previous years" (incorrect - the % breakdown was the same in last years board as well). If i am not good enough, so be it, it was a miracle to get my package together in 2 months from start to finish anyways. But if i dont get selected solely based on PCSM score, it's my own fault for not taking it into my own hands. Do your due diligence!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LawnmowerofDoom]

1 hour ago, bsTHUD said:

Bringing it to everyone's attention: ensure your Sq, Gp, and Wg are tracking the boards selection criteria. You can find their criteria if you go on the AF Portal, type in UFT, then hit the first link that brings up the PSDM, scroll down where people are asking questions and read through to find the % breakdown. I believe it's 40% leadership, 30% potential, and 30% aptitude/PCSM scores as they state they are looking for the "whole-person concept." I just found this out the hard way from my Gp stating "he has good stuff but his scores were lower than his competitors." This implied that the Gp doesn't rack and stack, they simply push packages up to the Wg but still put them in some sort of competitive order. This is coming from a guy who has a 93 pilot and 84 pcsm, recently was an LNO and forward deployed from that gig, numerous international and diplomatic ties, first-ever ACE coordination, with 1,000+ flying hours in the RPA community and plenty of combat experience PLUS a 3-star letter of rec and I was still put 3/3 at the Gp. That being said, i am pushing a screenshot of the Board's selection criteria breakdown up to the Wg to ensure they are tracking the % breakdown and not racking/stacking solely off of PCSM like the Gp stated, "the Wg will rack and stack based on PCSM scores like previous years" (incorrect - the % breakdown was the same in last years board as well). If i am not good enough, so be it, it was a miracle to get my package together in 2 months from start to finish anyways. But if i dont get selected solely based on PCSM score, it's my own fault for not taking it into my own hands. Do your due diligence!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah that's the frustrating part what your sq gp and wg think is competitive probably =/= the board's criteria. In our case RPA guys are a dime a dozen so picking arbitrary criteria is how it seems they delineate. In my case 2-4 strat in the sq was based on hours and I had the short stick. 

I did some poking and still dont know if we'll find out which packages got submitted and definitely dont expect to see the wg strats. 

Curious how they calculate potential and leadership. Assume that's where you see the outlier low scores get picked up -\_(-_-)_/-

[bsTHUD]

Yeah that's the frustrating part what your sq gp and wg think is competitive probably =/= the board's criteria. In our case RPA guys are a dime a dozen so picking arbitrary criteria is how it seems they delineate. In my case 2-4 strat in the sq was based on hours and I had the short stick. 
I did some poking and still dont know if we'll find out which packages got submitted and definitely dont expect to see the wg strats. 
Curious how they calculate potential and leadership. Assume that's where you see the outlier low scores get picked up -\_(-_-)_/-

I'm confused on that topic though because the Gp pushes out guidance IAW the Board suspense (never got eyes on anything from the Wg down to the Gp) and down to the Sq but I've never seen anything where the RPA community has its own criteria. That doesn't make sense how we would be held/scored to a different standard than the board would.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LawnmowerofDoom]

33 minutes ago, bsTHUD said:

I'm confused on that topic though because the Gp pushes out guidance IAW the Board suspense (never got eyes on anything from the Wg down to the Gp) and down to the Sq but I've never seen anything where the RPA community has its own criteria. That doesn't make sense how we would be held/scored to a different standard than the board would.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just from what I've seen and heard it seems to vary at each level if they'll push every competitive and qualified candidate or someone says while x candidates have a solid chance of being selected.... we're still gonna cut down to number y and if you arent one of the favorites... cyuh! I got shutdown at my sq last year then watched Lts from other sqs snag ENJJPT slots. Made for a slightly salty rest of my deployment. Fortunately, I wasnt in a dry country. In any case, I'm pressing as if im not selected. Board got pushed up this year, who is to say it won't happen again? 

[Justwanttofly]

I’m seeing a lot of comments about PCSM and what the board looks for and etc…I do want to say that if you happen to make it to the board, you have just as equal of a chance to make it as the next person. With that being said…the more competitive you make yourself, the better chance you have of being picked up. Now if you’re already in the rated community, for example RPA it’s going to be tough, and the reason being is because of the standards at the sq/gp/wg. Each command is entitled to judge and rack and stack as they please. If they want you to have a specific PCSM before they push you then that’s their stipulation and if you want it bad enough then I know you have it in you to get the score required. 
Now, you could be the best in your career field….that doesn’t mean you’ll be a good manned pilot, or that doesn’t necessarily show leadership potential. Are you doing something different than what every other person is doing who is applying to this board. Are you making an impact outside of work? Are you talking about how great you’ve been in your current career field and that’s it? Remember, the Air Force is ALWAYS going to choose what’s best for the Air Force and if your desires and interests fit into what the Air Force needs AND wants, then you have a good shot at getting picked up. 
Lastly, I’ll say this, keep killing it and growing in whatever you are doing currently. If this path is meant for you, it’ll happen. I’m a believer in God and do believe in his will and timing. I’m applying this year and if it’s meant for me I’ll get it. And I truly believe the same for you. Whether it’s your first time applying or third…don’t get discouraged. Good luck to everyone !

[Shadow2]

Is there a reg out there that states sq/gp/wg leadership don’t have to push packages to the board if they don’t want to? 

[bsTHUD]

Is there a reg out there that states sq/gp/wg leadership don’t have to push packages to the board if they don’t want to? 

This is along the lines of what I'm curious about. Us applicants never got eyes on anything other than the Boards selection criteria. Completely understand if Sq/Gp/Wg want to retain their members therefore use a different criteria than the Board but kinda backwards if you ask me. If Sq/Gp/Wg are only pushing packages with a certain score threshold, then why even submit a full package with accomplishments, accolades, letter of rec, etc to them. Wouldn't they just ask for aptitude scores instead? If the Board is looking to select those with the "whole-person" concept (which the AF embodied in most areas anyways), why limit the applicants being pushed to the Board solely based off of one area (scores).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Justwanttofly]

36 minutes ago, Shadow2 said:

Is there a reg out there that states sq/gp/wg leadership don’t have to push packages to the board if they don’t want to? 

I think this sentence out of the PDSM answers the question “The applicant’s Senior Rater is the nominating official (i.e., a wing commander or equivalent in a Senior Rater position)”. 
 

for example, you want to potentially get cgo of the quarter….just because you did some cool stuff in the quarter doesn’t mean you’re competitive to win that quarter. Your supervisor is going to use their discretion to determine if they’re going to submit a package for you. Same concept, if your sq/gp/wg doesn’t believe you’re competitive they don’t HAVE to submit or “nominate” you. I’m not saying it’s right but it’s how it works. Last year my WG/CC didn’t endorse my package because in his mind I didn’t have enough time in the career field or wasn’t close to the 2.5 year rated service commitment even though I was ranked 1/9 at my sq and then #2 at the group. 
My old Sq/CC tried to advocate for me the GP/CC tried and my new SQ/CC tried to advocate but nope. Did it suck? Yes but here I am a year later applying. #1 out the sq #1 out the gp…and no one knows where they ranked at the wg. 
So no there’s no reg that states they don’t have to push packages to the board if they don’t want to, but it’s common practice with any type of board.