MIL X HAD NMAC WITH SMA Y IN ATA. SEE AND AVOID CONCEPT.

Narrative

MIL X VFR IN R TFC TO RWY 1 TO LAND. SMA Y VFR FROM S WAS ADVISED TO RPT 3 MI FINAL; STRAIGHT-IN TO RWY 1 TO LAND. MIL X ON A R BASE TO FINAL WAS CLRED TO LAND. SMA Y RPTED ON A 3 MI FINAL WAS GIVEN A LNDG SEQUENCE AS #2 TO FOLLOW MIL X ON A 1 1/2 MI FINAL AHEAD OF YOU. I DID NOT RECEIVE A REPLY FROM SMA Y TO MY SEQUENCE AND I IMMEDIATELY WENT BACK AND QUESTIONED SMA Y IF HE RECEIVED MY SEQUENCE. MIL X THEN RPTED A NEAR-MISS WITH AN SMA HE BELIEVED. I ADVISED MIL X OF THE POS OF THE RPTING SMA BUT MIL X REPLIED; 'HE WASN'T THERE WHEN WE SAW HIM.' MIL X CONTINUED INBOUND AND LANDED; TAXIED TO THE TERMINAL RAMP AND CAME TO THE TWR. I DISCUSSED THE OCCURRENCE WITH THE FLC PLT. SMA Y HAD REQUESTED TO MAKE A 360 TURN ON HIS OWN; PROCEEDED INBOUND AND LANDED; TAXIED TO HIS HANGAR LOCATION. MIL X FILED AN NMAC RPT WITH LEESBURG FSS THAT INDICATES A R TURN EVASIVE ACTION WAS TAKEN. NO ACTION FILED BY SMA. AT THE TIME OF THIS OCCURRENCE; THE TWR WAS VERY BUSY INVOLVING A PARACHUTE JUMP OP AND SEVERAL VFR OVERFLT ACFT IN AND NEAR THE VICINITY OF THE PARACHUTE ACFT. THE TWR WAS ATTEMPTING TO CLR THE JUMP AREA 7 1/2 MI W OF THE ARPT PRIOR TO 'JUMPERS AWAY.' PERHAPS MORE 'PRO-ACTIVE' CTL AND MORE 'POSITIVE' POS RPTING OF ALL ACFT WILL HELP IN PREVENTING A RECURRENCE.