RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00047
            INDEX CODE:  128.10

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 310-day shortfall in his Aviator Continuation Pay (ACP) commitment
be waived and his military pay account in the amount of $21,572.78  be
reimbursed to him.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His debt was based on a shortfall of 310 days served towards  his  ACP
commitment.  He has already filled over 260 days and is on active duty
orders for another 270 days.  By 30 Sep 02, he will have  served  over
530 days of active duty, which is in excess of the  shortfall  by  220
days.  Therefore, he is requesting that this error be  corrected,  and
the corresponding debt of $19,647 be  eliminated  and  the  amount  of
money he has paid on the debt refunded.

In support of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  copies  of  his
DD Forms 214, Certificate of Release of Discharge  from  Active  Duty,
his Military Personnel Appropriation  (MPA)  orders,  a  military  pay
account statement, an ACP recoupment worksheet, and a letter from  the
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS).

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Available  documentation  indicates  that  the  applicant  entered  on
extended active duty on 1996.  He was released from active duty  on  5
Jan 01 under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3209  (Termination  of  AGR
Military Duty Tour/Conditional Release).   He  was  credited  with  19
years, 2 months, and 1 day of active duty service.

The remaining  relevant  facts  pertaining  to  this  application  are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the  Air
Force.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ANG/DPFP recommended denial.  ANG/DPFP noted that On  5  Jan  01,  the
applicant terminated his ACP contract and left  Active  Guard  Reserve
(AGR) status, one year after signing his ACP contract.  Currently,  he
is on extended active duty (EAD) orders in support of Operation  Noble
Eagle from 1 Oct 01 to 30 Sep 02.

According to ANG/DPFP, after terminating his full-time AGR orders, the
applicant generated a debt of  $21,527.78.   In  accordance  with  Air
National Guard  Fiscal  Year  2000  Aviator  Continuation  Pay  (ACP,)
Implementation  Guidelines,  dated  13 Dec 99,  “if  member  separated
before  completing  the  ACP  service  commitment  prior  payment   is
recalculated using the daily prorated method and excess recouped.   No
future payments are authorized.” The debt was  identified,  calculated
and collected according to the established guidelines.

According to ANG/DPFP, ACP entitlements were not designed for  members
not assigned to a full-time AGR unit manning document (UMD)  position.
It does not allow pilots to break up their full-time service, and does
not have provisions for paying Traditional Guardsmen who are placed on
EAD.  The applicant is no longer  assigned  to  a  full-time  AGR  UMD
position and is currently a Traditional Guardsman.

A complete copy of the ANG/DPFP evaluation, with  attachments,  is  at
Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In his response, the applicant indicated that he understands that  ACP
was not designed for members serving in different pay status  formats.
He does not feel that in  his  current  situation  that  he  would  be
eligible to start receiving ACP as an activated Traditional Guardsman.
 However, he is not asking to start receiving the ACP.  He  is  asking
to be credited for serving 652 days of active duty as  a  current  and
highly qualified F-16 Instructor  Pilot.   He  believes  the  ACP  was
intended to keep pilots serving in the ANG.   He  will  have  actively
served for 652 days at the point his activation  orders  terminate  on
30 Sep 02.
He may be forced to stay on after 30 Sep 02, adding to the  amount  of
active duty days served. In his opinion, he  has  more  than  complied
with the intent of the ACP.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law
or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to   demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice warranting corrective action.   We
note that when the  applicant  entered  into  his  ACP  agreement,  he
incurred a service commitment which required that he  remain  a  full-
time AGR for the number of  years  equal  to  the  years  of  his  ACP
payment.   The  available  evidence  indicates  that   the   applicant
terminated his ACP agreement when he left  AGR  status  and  became  a
Traditional Guardsman prior to completing his ACP service  commitment.
Since the contract stipulated that he continue in an  AGR  status,  he
incurred an  indebtedness  to  the  government  as  a  result  of  the
recoupment  of  the  unearned  portion   of   his   ACP   entitlement.
Furthermore, the applicant acknowledges that he  understood  that  ACP
was not designed for members serving in a different status.   In  view
of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence that the  applicant’s
AGR  tour  was  erroneously  terminated,  or  that  he   was   treated
differently from similarly situated individuals, we find no compelling
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
00047 in Executive Session on 4 Jun 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

      Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member
      Mr. Christopher Carey, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Jan 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ANG/DPFP, dated 21 Mar 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Apr 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, applicant, dated 22 Apr 02, w/atchs.




                                   VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
                                   Panel Chair