RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04089 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

He be declared eligible for the Fiscal Year 2012 (FY12) Aviator 
Continuation Pay (ACP) Program as of 1 Oct 11 and allowed to 
execute a two-year ACP agreement entitling him to $15,000.00 per 
year for two years. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The delayed release of the Air National Guard (ANG) FY12 ACP 
policy guidance resulted in him not being allowed to renew his 
ACP agreement in time to qualify for a two-year agreement. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving in the Air National Guard in 
the grade of lieutenant colonel (O-5). 

 

On 10 Sep 11, the applicant was ordered to active duty from 
1 Oct 09 through 30 Sep 13. This period authorized him to enter 
into a two-year FY12 ACP agreement; however, the release of the 
new FY12 policy was delayed until 24 Feb 12. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letters prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility and SAF/MRB Legal Advisor and are 
attached at Exhibits C and D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

NGB/A1PF recommends granting the applicant’s request to be 
declared eligible for the FY12 ACP Program indicating he met all 


eligibility requirements and the policy delay was through no 
fault of the applicant. According to the ANG FY12 ACP 
Implementation Policy, paragraph 1.7.3, ACP must be accepted 
within 30 days of initial eligibility, unless affected by 
unusual circumstances. Due to the delay in the release of the 
new FY12 ACP policy, the applicant no longer had the minimum 
agreement period of two years remaining on his order in order to 
be able to execute a two-year agreement. 

 

A complete copy of the NGB/A1PF evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

The SAF/MRB Legal Advisor states that the Board has the 
authority to correct the record to show acceptance by the 
Secretary of a valid ACP contract signed by the applicant on a 
date that would capture the whole period of eligibility; 
however, the Board should be very cautious about granting such 
applications. To warrant relief, the applicant must prove by 
sufficient evidence that he or she is the victim of a serious 
injustice not shared by other, similarly situated officers. 
Because it is impossible to execute incentives for past conduct, 
backdating ACP agreements violates the intent of Congress in 
authorizing ACP payments in the first place. However, due to 
the almost perpetual expectation that ACP will continue to be 
provided to Air Force pilots, many officers may develop an 
erroneous expectation that ACP is actually an entitlement versus 
an incentive. Conceivably, the Board may find this belief 
sympathetic and grant relief based on injustice, if that belief 
led to an active service commitment. Every case must be 
considered on its own facts and these facts require deliberation 
by the AFBCMR panels. As in all cases, the burden of proof 
remains with the applicant. 

 

A complete copy of the SAF/MRB evaluation is at Exhibit E. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant disagrees that an applicant must prove a serious 
injustice has occurred and that it is not shared by other, 
similarly situated officers. He points out that an indication 
from his ACP coordinator that he would be eligible for the FY12 
ACP factored into his decision to accept a two-year Active Guard 
Reserve (AGR) order. The delays in the release of the FY12 ACP 
policy were beyond his control and his case specific information 
qualifies him for relief. He requested the ACP as soon as he 
initially became eligible on 1 Oct 11. Five months later the 
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) authorized the FY12 
ACP program in February 2012. He was not able to apply in 
February because his AGR order was being amended from “temporary 
status” to “permanent” status. The organizations affected by 
this change in status had to work out a process to manage and 
coordinate the changes. Additionally, there was a significant 
delay caused by limitations in the ANG Reserve Order Writing 


System (AROWS). Nevertheless, throughout all of these changes, 
he was already on a long-term continuous AGR order, eligible for 
the FY12 ACP prior to the amendment, eligible after the order 
was issued, and the amendment extended his commitment dates. 

 

A complete copy of the applicant’s rebuttal 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 timely filed. 

 

3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. The 
applicant contends the delayed release of the Air National Guard 
(ANG) FY12 ACP policy unfairly precluded him from being able to 
execute a two-year ACP agreement even though he was otherwise 
qualified. After a thorough review of the evidence of record 
and the applicant’s complete submission, including his rebuttal 
response, we believe it is in the interest of justice to 
recommend granting the requested relief. While we note the 
comments of the SAF/MRB Legal Advisor indicating an applicant 
must prove by sufficient evidence that he or she is the victim 
of a serious injustice not shared by other, similarly situated 
officers, it is the opinion of the Board, that because the 
applicant signed the new ACP agreement as soon as the renewal 
became available, we find it reasonable to conclude that the 
applicant anticipated receiving the incentives outlined in the 
agreement. In this respect, we took notice of the applicant's 
complete submission in judging the merits of the case and agree 
with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for 
our conclusion the applicant has been the victim of an error or 
injustice. Therefore, we recommend his records be corrected as 
indicated below. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that 
competent authority approved his request for an Aviator 
Continuation Pay (ACP) contract for the period 1 October 2011 
through 30 September 2013 at a rate of $15,000 annually, under 
the Air National Guard Fiscal Year 2012 ACP program. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-04089 in Executive Session on 13 Jun 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-04089 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Aug 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PF, dated 23 Oct 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Nov 12. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 Apr 13, w/atch. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 21 May 13, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair