RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00819 INDEX CODE:	128.04
COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be paid Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP) for fiscal years (FY)
06 and 07.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
On or about 17 Dec 07, he was notified he was eligible for ACP because he had a full year of service for FY06 and FY07. He was originally denied ACP entitlement for FY07 due to not filing in a timely manner. He was denied ACP entitlement for FY06 due to having more than one order (not one full year continuous); however, the intention was to have him on duty for a full year. An uncertain man-day situation prevented his unit from cutting a ‘‘full year’’ on one order.

In support of his request, the applicant provided letters from his commander and ACP coordinator, copies of his ACP contract, Aeronautical Orders, and Special Orders.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The authorization to offer ACP to individuals on Military Personnel Appropriation (MPA) orders was not authorized until FY07.

Other relevant facts are outlined in the Air Force advisory opinion at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1PS recommends denial. A1PS states it appears the applicant was ordered to duty from 1 Oct 05 through 30 Sep 06 and again from 1 Oct 06 through 30 Sep 07. During these periods the applicant would have been under FY05 and FY06 ACP programs.

Under both FY programs, the Air National Guard paid ACP only to Active Guard Reserve (AGR) members. The applicant was ordered to duty during these time periods under Military Personnel Appropriation (MPA) authority and is; therefore, not entitled to receive ACP.

The complete NGB/A1PS evaluation is at Exhibit B.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The	applicant	replied	via	e-mail	stating	there	would	be	no rebuttal since the ACP policy appeared to be in black and white.

The applicant’s complete response is at 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 error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

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 evidence not considered with this application.

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2008-00819 in Executive Session on 3 March 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 8 Feb 08 w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Memorandum, NGB/A1PS, dated 12 Feb 09. Exhibit C.	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 18 Feb 09.
Exhibit D.	Applicant’s Response, dated 24 Feb 09.