RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04460
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He receive Aviator Continuation Pay (ACP) for 2-years beginning
Fiscal Year 2012 (FY12) 1 Oct 11.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was eligible to receive ACP in FY12; however, the message
authorizing ACP was not released until 24 Feb 12.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of a
letter from NGB/A1PF, a copy of his FY12 Navigator and Combat
System Operator Aviator Continuation Pay (ACP) Agreement
Statement of Understanding, a copy of his special order, and a
copy of his Individual Data Summary.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the Air National Guard
(ANG) in the grade of major.
The applicants FY12 Navigator and Combat System Operator Aviator
Continuation Pay (ACP) Agreement Statement of Understanding,
dated 26 Mar 12, reflects he elected Option B - $15,000/Yr,
effective 1 Oct 11.
On 11 Jun 12, AFBCMR sent the applicant the SAF/MRB Legal
Advisory, dated 9 Apr 13, see Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1PF recommends approval. The release of the FY12 ACP policy
was delayed until 24 Feb 12 and the applicant was not able to
submit his application for ACP until after 24 Feb 12, which was
outside the 30-day processing window that is allowed per the
governing ANG FY12 ACP Policy. This delay was through no fault
of the applicants and made him ineligible because he no longer
had the minimum agreement period of 2 years remaining on his
order. He meets all other eligibility requirements and has
provided the required documentation to show his eligibility.
The complete NGB/A1PF evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
When he signed the ACP paperwork he was promised that he would be
awarded the ACP, which was a big incentive and one of the reasons
he signed the contract that he did. He understood the contract
and understood that he was eligible for ACP. He realized that
there would be a delay in the FY11 [sic] ACP, but it would not
have an effect on him receiving the incentive pay. He
respectfully requests to be paid the ACP that was guaranteed to
him.
The applicants complete submission 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 applicants 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 APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 1 October
2011, he submitted an Aviator Continuation Pay (ACP) agreement
effective 1 October 2011 through 30 September 2013, thereby
entitling him to $15,000 per year for the length of the agreement
and that competent authority approved his application effective
1 October 2011.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-04460 in Executive Session on 27 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 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PF, dated 10 Jan 13.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jan 13.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRB, dated 9 Apr 13.
Exhibit F. Email, AFBCMR, dated 11 Jun 11.
Exhibit G. Email, Applicant, dated 13 Jun 13.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04059
On 11 Jun 12, AFBCMR sent the applicant the SAF/MRB Legal Advisory, dated 9 Apr 13, see Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PF recommends approval. The complete NGB/A1PF evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He was under the impression that ACP was not authorized at the time he signed his contract only due to Congressional...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04089
________________________________________________________________ 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 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04502
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was the victim of an injustice because the Air Force did not release the FY12 ACP Program in time for FY12. Because of the delay in the release of the FY12 ACP Program, when the program was implemented he no longer had the minimum agreement period of two-years remaining on his orders to receive ACP. Given that the applicant was a fully qualified member of a career field which the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04689
He was also told that there was a delay with FY 12 ACP (as there had been in years past) but that the delay would not have an effect on his receiving ACP. 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 applicants AGR advisor told him that he met all eligibility requirements,...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01738
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01738 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he is eligible to participate in the Air National Guard (ANG) Aviator Continuation Pay (ACP) program for fiscal year 2012 (FY12) with a three-year tour service commitment. An error and delay in processing his...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00960
Backdating an ACP agreement essentially offers an incentive to an officer for a decision he has already made and provides a retention bonus for a period of service already served. Paragraph 2.2.1 of the ANG FY13 ARP Policy states that members on probationary tours must have orders in hand that cover the entire length of the agreement at the time of their application. The applicant was eligible for a FY13 ARP Agreement that covers the period 7 Jun 13 through 31 Jan 17 at $15,000 per year...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 04158
Based upon the published policy guidance, the fact that he met all eligibility requirements and that the delay in release of the FY12 ACP policy was through no fault of the member, we recommend approval of the above member's request. To date, a response has not been received (Exhibit C). Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 October 2012.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-04158
Based upon the published policy guidance, the fact that he met all eligibility requirements and that the delay in release of the FY12 ACP policy was through no fault of the member, we recommend approval of the above member's request. To date, a response has not been received (Exhibit C). Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 October 2012.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02941
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. Based upon the published policy guidance, the fact that the applicant met all eligibility requirements and that the delay in release of the FY12 ACP policy was through no fault of his, they recommend approval of the applicant's requests. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-04161
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 attached at Exhibits B and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PF recommends approval. 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...