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.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Even though the announcement of the FY13 ANG ARP policy was
delayed, he was still able to submit his application, on or before
1 Jul 13. However, because of a lack of understanding of the
process, several corrections had to be made by his ARP
coordinator, resulting in his application being denied just one
day after his eligibility for ARP had expired.
He submitted an appeal to his Wing Inspector Generals (IG)
office; however, his complaint was referred the Texas Air National
Guard (TX ANG) IGs office and he was advised to contact the
National Guard Bureau (NGB) Subject Matter Expert (SME) for
resolution. Subsequently, his application was denied because he
did not have sufficient time left before reaching 18 years of
TAFMS.
He believes had it not taken five months of coordination to verify
his eligibility and get materials submitted three times, he would
not have missed the cutoff. Further, the IGs methodology of
asking the key figure in his complaint to look at it again was
somewhat questionable, seeing that he came to the same conclusion
as before.
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 (TAFMS)
for the program left.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the TX ANG, as an Active
Guard Reserve (AGR) member, in the grade of lieutenant colonel (O-
5).
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) (now ARP) 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. True incentives influence
decisions about the future. 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. Every year,
in every retention program, some Air Force members do not meet the
criteria for obtaining the bonus. Some may miss eligibility by
only a few days. In all such cases those who do not meet
eligibility have no claim in equity since these programs operate
without regard to individual cases.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1PF recommends denial, indicating that after a thorough
review of the applicants request, he is ineligible for the
FY13 ARP agreement.
A1PF notes the applicant submitted three separate ARP contracts;
each one did not meet eligibility requirements for one or more
reasons. The parameters that allow A1PF to determine eligibility
for ARP are spelled out in, paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 of the FY13 ANG
ARP Policy.
A1PF notes, of particular concern, to ensure that no member or
unit manipulates the orders system for the sole purpose and intent
of receiving bonus monies. The ARP program is an ANG recruiting
and retention tool used to encourage rated officers to serve in an
active status in the ANG in aviation service and is not considered
an entitlement. ANGI 36-101, Air National Guard Reserve (AGR)
Program, para 6.1.1.3., states "Rated AGR officers eligible for
ARP agreements must have AGR orders to match the length of their
ARP agreement." According to ANGI 36-101, the initial probationary
tour for an AGR member "will not exceed six years", it further
establishes that the unit has the ability to extend the members
orders at any point in time in para 6.4.1. "Extension of the
current tour or selection for subsequent tours is based on the
mission needs of the unit, Airman's performance, and authorized
force structure. An AGR Airman will be considered career status
upon completion of the initial AGR tour and order renewal."
As the office of primary responsibility for ARP, A1PF does not
have the ability to correct member's dates to make them eligible
retroactively. Nor can A1PF predate an order to make the member
eligible, i.e., make the order issue date FY13 instead of FY14.
The complete A1PF evaluation is at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation, including the SAF Memoranda
(redacted), was forwarded to the applicant on 23 Jan 15, 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 took
notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and
recommendation of the National Guard Bureau office of primary
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our
conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of
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-2014-01790 in Executive Session on 14 Apr 15 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Mar 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PF, 7 Nov 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Jan 15, w/atchs.
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 | 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 | 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 00475
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. 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...
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 00915
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. In accordance with ANGI 36-101, Air National Guard Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Program, chapter 6, paragraph 6.1, this order is considered probationary. Paragraph 2.2.1 of the ANG FY 2013 ARP Policy states that members on probationary tours must have orders in hand that cover the entire length of the agreement at...
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 | 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 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...