RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03910
		INDEX CODE:  128.06
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be reimbursed Incentive Special Pay (ISP) for the period of October 2001 through April 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He submitted a late ISP contract for retroactive pay.  His request was denied and his appeal was denied.  He served continuously during this time period and met the eligibility provisions of the ISP contract.  His delay was due to post 11 Sep 01 preparedness and his deployment from December 2001 through March 2002.  

In support of his request, applicant provided documentation associated with his ISP contract request.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving on extended active duty as a medical corps officer in the grade of lieutenant colonel.  The applicant's commander submitted an ISP contract to DPAMF1 in May 2002 to be effective 1 Oct 01.  The request was denied by DPAMF1.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAMF1 recommends denial.  DPAMF1 states that on 20 May 02 the 347MDG/CC requested the applicant be paid retroactive ISP for 1 Oct 01 through 30 Sep 02.  The commander stated that the applicant "overlooked signing his contract" and had been on a 3-month long deployment.  DPAMF1 denied the request stating that overlooking the requirement to submit an ISP contract for more than 6 months (far beyond the submission deadline of 30 Nov 01) is not a valid reason for retroactive payment of medical special pay.  Additionally, the 3-month deployment was not a valid reason to authorize a retroactive payment; although deployment could have been grounds for a 3-month waiver, he allowed another 3 months to pass after returning from the deployment before addressing the issue.  ISP is a retention tool that carries a 1-year obligation beginning the date the officer accepts such special pay, per Title 37, OASD/HA Letter dated 16 Aug 01, and AFPC/DPA MPFM 01-31.  It is not normally allowed that a member receive backdated special pay for time already served unless there is evidence of failure on part of the Air Force.  His legal counsel stated that he consistently submitted late ISP contracts and despite late submissions received full annual payment.  DPAFM1 cannot account for those circumstances.  Retroactive payment was not authorized because of published guidance.  It was recommended that the applicant request USAF/SG authorize the retroactive payment.  However, authorization was not received from USAF/SG.  The DPAMF1 evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 17 Jan 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, the Board majority agrees with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopts their rationale as the basis for their conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board majority believes that the applicant had reasonable time prior to and subsequent to his deployment to submit his ISP contract, yet he failed to do so.  Persuasive evidence has not been presented which would lead the majority of the Board to excuse his untimely submission.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board Majority finds no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2002-03910 in Executive Session on 9 Apr 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny the request.  Mr. Gallogly voted to correct the record and did not desire to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Nov 02.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPAMF1, dated 8 Jan 03.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 17 Jan 03.

								

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
               FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of 

	I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that the application be denied.

	Please advise the applicant accordingly.