RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00038 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His aviator retention pay (ARP) contract be effective from, 1 February 2013 through 31 January 2015, making him eligible for a 2 year option, $15,000 ARP bonus. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was unable to sign the ARP contract until the 2013 ARP policy was released. The policy was approved and signed on 7 June 2013, nine months after the beginning of FY13. He was eligible for the 2 year, $15,000 ARP bonus as of 1 February 2013. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the South Dakota Air National Guard in the grade of lieutenant colonel. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ANGB/A1PF recommends approval. The applicant should be permitted to request, execute, and be paid for a Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 ARP agreement. According to Special Order A-S000009, dated 27 January 2009, the applicant was ordered to duty from 1 February 2009 through 31 January 2015. This period allows him to enter into a Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 ARP agreement. However, the release of the FY 20l3 ARP Policy was delayed until 7 June 2013. Because of this delay, the applicant was unable to submit his application for ARP until after 7 June 2013, which is outside of the 30-day processing window allowed per paragraph 1.7.3 of the ANG FY 20l3 ARP Policy. Except for the delay in policy release, the applicant meets all other eligibility requirements. A complete copy of the NGB/A1PF evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8 September 2014, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). To date, a response has not been received by this office. ________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant was provided copies of documents describing a recent decision by the Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) pertaining to Aviator Continuation Pay (now Aviator Retention Pay) on 25 November 2014, for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has not been received. The complete AFBCMR memorandum, with attachments, 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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we are not convinced the evidence presented by the applicant is sufficient to conclude that he is the victim of an error or injustice that would warrant corrective action. While we note the NGB/A1PF recommendation to grant the applicant’s request because the delay in the release of the FY 2013 ARP Policy was through no fault of his own, we are not convinced the applicant is the victim of an injustice. In this respect, we note that ARP is an incentive program, not an entitlement and true incentives influence decisions about the future. Therefore, correcting the applicant’s records to reflect a backdated 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. Furthermore, 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. 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-2014-00038 in Executive Session on 8 January 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Dec 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1PF, dated 4 Mar 14 w/atchs. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Sep 14. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Nov 14, w/atchs.