RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04502 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His initial eligibility date for the Fiscal Year 2012 (FY12) 
Aviator Continuation Pay (ACP) Program be changed to 1 Oct 11. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. As a pilot, he 
committed a full two-year assignment from 1 Oct 11 through 
30 Sep 13 to allow him to enter into an FY12 two-year ACP 
agreement. 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. Therefore, he should receive the full FY12 ACP 
beginning 1 Oct 11. 

 

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

 

_________________ ______________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant served as a pilot in the Air National Guard (ANG) 
during the period of time in question. 

 

On 1 Oct 11, the applicant accepted two-year orders to fly for 
the ANG through 30 Sep 13. 

 

On 30 Mar 12, the applicant signed the FY12 Pilot ACP Agreement 
Statement of Understanding (SOU), selecting Option B (two 
years), identifying 1 Oct 11 as the start of his program. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of 
primary responsibility (OPRs) which are included at Exhibits C 
and E. 

 


________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

NGB/A1PF recommends approval, indicating there is evidence of an 
error or injustice. In accordance with Special Order A-9000302, 
dated 29 Sep 11, the applicant was ordered to duty from 1 Oct 11 
through 30 Sep 13. The period would allow him to enter into a 
two-year FY12 ACP agreement. However, the release of the FY12 
ACP policy was delayed until 24 Feb 12. Because of the delay, 
the applicant was unable to submit his application for ACP until 
after 24 Sep 12, which is outside of the 30 day processing 
window allowed per the ANG FY12 ACP Policy. This delay also 
made him ineligible because he no longer had the minimum 
agreement period of two years remaining on his orders. The 
delay was through no fault of his own and the applicant meets 
all other eligibility requirements. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 21 Jan 13 for review and comment within 30 days. 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit D). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

SECOND AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

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, 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 believe 
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 Legal Advisor evaluation is at 
Exhibit E. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE SECOND AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the second Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 7 May 13 for review and comment within 30 days. As 
of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibits 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 delay in the release of the FY12 ACP 
Program created an injustice which prevented him from 
participating in the program for which he met all of the 
qualifications except submitting a timely application. We 
considered the applicant’s complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case and agree with the opinion and recommendation 
of NGB/AIPF and adopt its rationale as the bases of our 
conclusions the applicant has been the victim of an injustice. 
The Board believes the applicant was fully aware of the pending 
FY12 ACP program and intended to participate when he agreed to a 
two-year continuation commitment with the Air Force at the 
1 Oct 11 start of the FY. Given that the applicant was a fully 
qualified member of a career field which the Air Force 
identified as requiring substantial financial incentives in 
order to maintain an adequate pool of available resources; 
served during the FY in which the Air Force intentionally 
incentivized all qualified members through the implementation of 
continuation incentives; and consciously made the full 
continuation commitment intended by the Air Force through 
implementation of the program; then, the fact the Air Force did 
not have the FY12 program in place by the start of FY12 
constitutes an injustice which denied the applicant the program 
participation he otherwise qualified for by making the very 
commitment the Air Force intended. In addition, while we note 
the applicant failed to sign his application within the 30-day 
window required by ANG Policy, the National Guard Bureau’s 
recommendation to grant the applicant’s request in the face of 
the violation of their policy is sufficient justification for 
the Board. 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 on 
1 October 2011 he applied for the FY12 Pilot Aviator 
Continuation Pay Program, Option B, and his application was 
approved by competent authority. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-04502 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 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Mar 13, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PF, dated 11 Jan 13. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jan 13. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRB Legal Advisor, dated 9 Apr 13. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 May 13, w/atch. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair