Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01033
Original file (BC 2009 01033.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-01033
		
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be eligible to participate in the Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08) Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP) program.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His unit is a traditional C-130 unit and has no active duty positions, thus he was not aware of the ACP program until he was on deployment and found out about the program through other Air National Guard (ANG) crew members.  Upon finding out about the program, he contacted his unit immediately and was told, after some investigation into the program, that he was eligible to participate in the program.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of his orders, an ACP agreement, an ACP log, and his aeronautical order (AO).

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving with the Ohio ANG (OHANG) in a rated position in the grade of lieutenant colonel (Lt Col).  The record indicates he was originally ordered to active duty from 18 May to 30 June 2008.  Those orders were extended to 21 July 2008, and extended again to 30 September 2008.  A new order was then produced ordering him to active duty from 18 July 2008 to 30 September 2009.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1PS agrees with NGB/A1FF, the subject matter expert (SME), and recommends denial.  A1FF notes that the applicant’s active duty order was extended several times in order for him to reach one year of active duty service.  Because he was not on orders for a continuous year (no extensions or amendments), he is not eligible for FY08 ACP.  Additionally, as members are only eligible for ACP for up to 20 YAS, he is also not eligible for FY08 ACP as he reached his 20 YAS approximately one month into his tour.

A1PS’s complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7 May 2009 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

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.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 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 BC-2009-01033 in Executive Session on 23 June 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Mar 09, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 13 Apr 09, w/atch.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 May 2009.




                                   
                                   Chair





1


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-04301

    Original file (BC-2008-04301.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He met the eligibility requirements to participate in the ANG FY08 ACP program as he was on one continuous active duty order for the entire FY performing the duties of an ANG pilot during that time frame. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00604

    Original file (BC-2009-00604.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    His records be corrected to show his eligibility to participate in the Air National Guard (ANG) Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08) Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP) program. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we note the applicant did not meet ANG FY08 ACP eligibility requirements for the FY08 ACP program. The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00573

    Original file (BC-2009-00573.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00573 INDEX CODE: 128.04 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show his eligibility to participate in the Air National Guard (ANG) Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08) Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP) program. The applicant was initially ordered to extended active duty from 1 Mar...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-02323

    Original file (BC-2009-02323.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: ANG eligibility requirements for the FY08 ACP program required aviators to be on active duty orders for one uninterrupted year (no amendments or modifications to original orders); have less than 20 years of aviation service (YAS) at application and, not go over 20 YAS during the current contract. The applicant was initially ordered to extended active duty from 1 Oct 07 through 31 Dec 07. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03725

    Original file (BC-2011-03725.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, no eligible RPA pilot will be able to take advantage of this due to the way one year orders are allocated and the delay in the release of the FY11 guidance. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his Air National Guard (ANG) FY11 ACP Program Announcement and Implementation Policy, aeronautical order, FY11 ACP Agreement Statement of Understanding (SOU), and other documents in support of his application. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 00277

    Original file (BC 2009 00277.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, applicant submits copies of his ACP Agreement, his aeronautical order and extracts from the FY07 ACP Implementation Policy and Special Orders R-B00027, R-C000269 and R-C000164. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINED THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-04140

    Original file (BC-2009-04140.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The 1,095 day rule limits otherwise willing aviators to less than a continuous year of service thereby, making them ineligible to participate in the ANG ACP program for that particular year. ANG eligibility requirements for the FY09 ACP program required aviators to be on active duty orders cut for one continuous, uninterrupted year. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-04168

    Original file (BC-2009-04168.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The 1,095 day rule limits otherwise willing aviators to less than a continuous year of service thereby, making them ineligible to participate in the ANG ACP program for that particular year. ANG eligibility requirements for the FY09 ACP program required aviators to be on active duty orders cut for one continuous, uninterrupted year. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00311

    Original file (BC-2009-00311.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00311 INDEX CODE: 128.04 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show his eligibility to participate in the Air National Guard (ANG) Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08) Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP) program. The ANG has informed him that in order to be eligible to participate...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02191

    Original file (BC-2011-02191.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 1 Oct 10, he became eligible for ACP when he received his initial AGR tour orders. The applicant was initially ordered to extended active duty from 1 Oct 10 to 30 Sep 13. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the...