RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00475
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Aviator Retention Pay (ARP) contract be changed to reflect he
is on a four-year Air Guard Reserve (AGR) tour.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He is eligible for ARP but was denied due to the delay in the
release of the fiscal year guidance which was no fault of his own.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the California Air National
Guard (ANG) in the grade of major (O-4).
On 12 May 2014, the Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) denied
relief to two applicants making similar arguments to the AFBCMR.
Her memorandum stated, in part, that Aviator Continuation Pay
(ACP) is an incentive program, not an entitlement. The intent of
Congress (and therefore the purpose of the statute) was to provide
an incentive that would encourage aviation service officers not to
leave active duty. 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.
Doing so would depart from the purpose of the statute.
Furthermore, because the decision whether or not to offer ACP in
any given year is entirely at the discretion of the Secretary, any
delay in approval of the program for a given year cannot become
the basis for a retroactive recovery.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1PF recommends approval. AlPF states they concluded that the
applicant should be permitted to request, execute, and be paid for
a Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 ARP agreement effective 15 Feb 13 through
14 Feb 17 at $25,000 per year.
a. According to Special Order A-0000017 dated 10 Feb 13, the
applicant was ordered to active duty from 15 Feb 13 through 14 Feb
17. This period allows him to enter into an FY13 ARP agreement.
However, the release of the FY13 ARP policy was delayed until 7
Jun 13. Because of this delay, the applicant was unable to submit
his application for ARP until after 7 Jun 13, which was outside of
the 30 day processing window allowed in accordance with ANG FY13
ARP Policy, paragraph 1.7.3.
b. Based upon the published policy guidance, the fact that
the applicant met all eligibility requirements and that the delay
in release of the FY13 ACP policy was through no fault of his own,
they recommend approval of the applicant' s request.
The complete 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 29 Sep 14 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office (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 an error or injustice. We note that
NGB/A1PF recommends approval; however, we note that in the
Secretary of the Air Forces (SECAF) memorandum dated 12 May 2014,
she denied relief to two applicants making similar arguments to
the AFBCMR noting the ARP is an incentive program, not an
entitlement. As pointed out in the memorandum, the intent of
Congress (and therefore the purpose of the statute) was to provide
an incentive that would encourage aviation service officers not to
leave active duty. True incentives influence decisions about the
future. Backdating an ARP 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.
Doing so would depart from the purpose of the statute. Moreover,
because the decision whether or not to offer ARP in any given year
is entirely at the discretion of the Secretary, any delay in
approval of the program for a given year cannot become the basis
for a retroactive recovery. In view of the above, the applicant
has failed to sustain his burden that he has been the victim of an
error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested
relief.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-00475 in Executive Session on 9 Dec 14, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Jan 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PF, dated 25 Mar 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Sep 14.
3
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00946
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00946 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Aviator Retention Pay (ARP) eligibility date of 7 Jun 13 be changed to 1 Feb 13 to make him eligible for a four-year Air National Guard (ANG) Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 ARP Agreement. Furthermore, because the decision whether or not to offer ACP in any given year is entirely at the discretion of the Secretary, any...
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 2013 03832
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03832 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His initial eligibility and start date for Aviator Retention Pay (ARP) be 11 Feb 13. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The delayed release of the Air National Guard (ANG) Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 ARP policy guidance resulted in his not being allowed to renew his two-year ARP agreement. A complete copy of the applicants...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01030
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. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PF recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Therefore,...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03525
Furthermore, because the decision whether or not to offer ACP in any given year is entirely at the discretion of the Secretary, any delay in approval of the program for a given year cannot become the basis for a retroactive recovery. On 12 Jul 14, SAF/MRBR forwarded the applicant copies of the noted SecAF decisions for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit I). APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In a letter dated 11 Mar 14, the applicant requested his application be re-opened....
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05602
The intent of Congress (and therefore the purpose of the statute) was to provide an incentive that would encourage aviation service officers not to leave active duty. Upon review of his application, A1PF concluded that he should be permitted to adjust the effective date of his current FY13 ARP agreement from 27 Aug 13 to 2 Feb 13. However, in view of the fact the Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF) has determined that any delay in the approval of the ARP program for a given year cannot...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01790
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01790 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be approved for the Fiscal Year 2013 (FY13) Air National Guard (ANG) Aviator Retention Pay (ARP) retroactive to 1 Jul 13. Two other members of his unit, who submitted their applications around the same time, were approved for the ARP, because they had more eligibility (Total Active Federal Military Service...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03608
Furthermore, because the decision whether or not to offer ACP in any given year is entirely at the discretion of the Secretary, any delay in approval of the program for a given year cannot become the basis for a retroactive recovery. The complete SecAF decision is at Exhibit F. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PF recommends denial. Upon further review of the documents provided, A1PF concludes he should be permitted to request,...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03760
According to the FY 2013 ANG ARP Policy, paragraph 2.1.7, each aviator must: Be eligible for at least two continuous years of full time duty upon acceptance of an ARP Agreement." We took notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the merits of the case; and note the Air Force office of primary responsibilitys recommendation to grant the applicants request because the release of the FY 2013 ARP Policy was delayed until 7 June 2013. Exhibit G. Letters, Secretary of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00616
We note that in light of the SecAFs decision to deny relief to two applicants making similar arguments to the Board, the Air Force OPR recommended the applicants request be denied. 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...