Why NRPS hasn’t got the X-factor

FOLLOWING the excellent news that the X-factor will be increased, can I ask why non-Regular permanent staff (NRPS) do not receive it?

The X-factor compensates for such things as, for example, being subject to military discipline, liability for duty at all times, the inability to resign at will, change jobs or negotiate pay, and the danger, turbulence and separation which are part of Service life.

Operational tours play only a part in the criteria (although those on ops deserve every penny and more).
However, not everyone in the Army – Regular or not – deploys on ops, yet many receive the X-factor, or a percentage of it.

NRPS personnel meet most of the criteria but do not get it. – Name and address supplied.

Mark Ryan, Sp Policy Pay and Charges, responds: It is not true that NRPS meet most of the criteria for X-factor. They are recruited to provide administrative support to the Territorial Army and are appointed to specified posts.
They may not be posted to a different location outside reasonable travelling distance without their agreement. An NRPS soldier may relinquish his appointment by giving 61 days’ notice, although this period can be reduced by mutual consent. With the exception of those filling certain Royal Signals posts, NRPS can be mobilised only during periods of national danger or attack on the UK.
Further, when mobilised they can only be deployed in the UK, Channel Islands and Isle of Man.
In short, NRPS are not faced with the same level of turbulence and separation as their Regular counterparts and can only be deployed in limited circumstances.

Room cheaper than garage

I FIND myself in the unbelievable position of paying more each month for my garage (more than £23) than I do for my accommodation.

That’s bad enough, but I also find that as a single soldier living in, I pay £8 a month more than a married soldier. How fair is that?

The garages are exactly the same size, and the married quarter garages are in a block some distance from the house, the same location as my garage.

So why do living-in soldiers have to pay more for the same? – Name and address supplied.

Brig Jamie Gordon, DPS(A), replies: Garage charges are set by the Armed Forces Pay Review Board and reflect size and condition, not marital state.
A small garage or one which provides poor physical security, as designated by Defence Estates, will be charged at the sub-standard rate of 50p a day, which works out at about £8 a month less than the full charge of 75p a day.
Check your grading with Defence Estates if you think it is below spec, your regimental admin officer or quartermaster’s department should be able to assist.
Your accommodation charge reflects the standard of your accommodation so you are presumably in grade four. I am sorry you are in poor accommodation, but at least the charge is low and you appear to have a good garage.

Older son has to share with baby

I AM approaching my 22-year point and have been selected for commissioning, so my family and I are preparing to move from our Type D (four-bedroom) house to new accommodation on an officers’ patch.

We are having a nightmare with Defence Housing (DH) as they are fixated with JSP 464 and do not understand my family’s needs.

JSP 464 states that for a family to qualify for four-bed Service families accommodation (SFA), all children must be over the age of ten. I imagine this was written assuming the children would be within a couple of years of each other and sharing a bedroom would be practical.

This is reasonable under normal circumstances, although not every family fits into the “normal” bracket. I have three children, a 15-year-old girl, a 12-year-old boy and a baby boy of two, and I have been told I will only get a three-bedroom house as that’s my entitlement according to JSP 464.

My older son will be expected to share with his baby brother, which will create problems, not least in his sleeping patterns (he has to go to school). There should be guidelines for allocation, but why does this tri-Service document not cater for families outside the norm?
RAF warrant officers are entitled to four-bedroom houses regardless of family size, which I have no doubt prevents those who have greater need of four bedrooms from getting them. The rules should be rewritten. – Name and address supplied.

Brig Jamie Gordon, DPS(A), replies: The rule DE is applying follows Government policy on house sizes issued by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. It states that a pair of children of differing sexes under ten is expected to share a bedroom, as are pairs of children under 21 of the same sex.
Your 12- and two-year-old sons fall into the latter category. Only differing sex children over ten should not share. To resolve your problem, can I suggest that you get your chain of command to engage with the regional chain of command to engage with DE’s Housing Information Centre. Also check out Para 0510b of JSP 464 Part 1 and talk to my staff on 94344 8220.

Civvies paying less council tax than us

I LIVE in a quarter in Tidworth Garrison and compared my contribution in lieu of council tax (CILOCT) to the council tax paid by civilians living in the area.

All homes in the UK were graded in 1991 on their value at that time. Who graded our quarters for CILOCT and why are they different from the civilian gradings? Where does the money go?

My quarter is graded band B (by Kennet council) and my CILOCT total for the year is £1,160. Yet civilians in the town in band B houses pay £1,046, a difference of £114. Why?

If some of the proceeds of CILOCT in the UK goes to the local council, where does the rest of it go? – Name and address supplied.

Brig Jamie Gordon, DPS(A), replies: Council tax (CT) is payable on all residential properties in Britain.
The MoD pays CILOCT to the Department of Communities and Local Government, which reflects a national average amount of CT that would be due for each type of property.
The MoD’s CT contribution is calculated annually and the resultant average charge for each type of property, including soldiers living accommodation (SLA), is worked out. Personnel then pay a standard CILOCT rate for the same type of property, regardless of location.
Therefore, while you now may pay slightly more or less than civilians locally, there are other areas where you will be paying less.

LOA runs hot and cold

A FEW weeks ago we had an informative visit from a local overseas allowance (LOA) review team who gave us a useful presentation on what LOA is made up of. I was surprised to learn that in a tropical country “domestic assistance” is included as one of the factors.

It is incredible that here in Canada, where summer temperatures reach 40C and in winter drop to -30C, the extra costs of cooling and heating a household, compared with the UK, are not taken into account for LOA.

The disparity of LOA between ranks is also incredible. When I was commissioned I found that despite receiving a major’s rate, I was £150 (non-taxable) a month out of pocket. Today the gap between a WO1 and a major has increased to £300 a month – a nice non-taxable £3,600 a year.

This means that a WO1’s take-home wages are more than a major’s, especially when the major finds himself in the high tax bracket. Why is LOA not a flat rate for everyone? The new rates of disturbance allowance are the same regardless of rank, so why not LOA? I still have to buy the same items. – Capt E R Smith, HQ British Army Training Unit Suffield, Canada.

Brig Jamie Gordon, DPS(A), replies: LOA is supposed to reflect a UK lifestyle but deviates from this where local cultural norms dictate a variation in lifestyle or behaviour. Domestic assistance is included in countries where it is the cultural norm to employ servants. LOA does not take utilities bills into account. Having done some research I can tell you that, on average, utilities bills at Batus are cheaper than the UK and cheaper than the Fuel Subsidy Scheme.
The presentation you received explained the Factor Plan, which leads to the disparity in LOA on commissioning, and I know that it was discussed. You will recall that the marker ranks used when calculating LOA are corporal and captain.
From these, a married accompanied WO1 with one child will receive 1.6 times the LOA of a married accompanied corporal with one child, while a married accompanied major with one child will receive 1.3 times the LOA of a married accompanied captain with one child.
One of the disadvantages with the Factor Plan is that Late Entry (LE) officers are lumped in with their Direct Entry (DE) counterparts, so an LE captain’s spending pattern is assumed to be the same as that of a DE captain. My staff recognise the problems this causes and, as part of the Strategic Remuneration Review, a more equitable system of calculating LOA is being explored, but I should warn you that finding a perfect system with no losers is difficult.

Not being paid in the rank

IN August 2006 I was warned off for Op Oculus in the Balkans and told I would be given the acting rank of sergeant for the duration.

As Oculus was due to end two months after my end-of-tour date, I was asked to extend, which I did, returning to the UK last June.

I was not paid in the higher rank during the tour and eventually received an email from APC Glasgow informing me that they were aware of the problem and that I was on a spreadsheet waiting to be actioned.

I have now deployed on Op Herrick and am finding it very difficult to go on trying to sort this out.

I have been more than patient over the past 15 months but have now been told that my only option is to submit a formal complaint to my commanding officer, a difficult course of action due to me being on operations.

I have also been told that I would be within my rights to ask for interest on the money owed. Both I and my admin staff have had more than enough of this problem. – Cpl S James, 21 Signal Regiment, Op Herrick.

Lt Col Jamie Compston, R Signals Wing, responds: Your acting rank is being sorted by SPVA and you will get the backdated pay for carrying out the duties of a sergeant while deployed.
The reason this unfortunate situation occurred is because your unit allowed you to deploy without first requesting acting rank of sergeant. On your return your parent MCM Division (as we were then) received a request to grant retrospective acting rank, which was agreed and signed off on July 11, 2007. This is when the clock started ticking.
A Royal Signals policy directive that acting rank will be backdated only in exceptional circumstances had not been complied with; had it been this situation would never have arisen. The application then entered into the era of JPA, which caused further delay.

I AM a Territorial Army officer on Op Telic 11. I was mobilised after being offered a job as an ADC to a brigadier. I was told I would be given the acting rank of captain and paid accordingly.

At Chilwell I was told this would be actioned by the unit I was deploying to, but in theatre I was told the authority came from the job description and that my pay would take a couple of months to sort out before I noticed the increase.

Now I have been told there is no record of my acting rank ever being implemented and that it is not a JPA issue. I am £4,000 or so out of pocket because no one is willing to take responsibility. – A/Capt M Hall, Op Telic.

Col Gary Hearn, APC, TA and Reserves Manning and Career Management Div, responds: There appears to be a lack of understanding of a well-proven process at a number of stages of your case, so I will say what should have happened before addressing your situation.
All Reservists are mobilised through the Reserves Training and Mobilisation Centre at Chilwell in their substantive rank, so you were correctly mobilised as a substantive lieutenant. It is then for the in-theatre admin unit to carry out the acting rank action on JPA. This appears not to have occurred in your case.
Your JPA record has now been updated with your acting rank shown as of your in-theatre date. This should allow you to be paid as a captain for the duration of your tour and to initiate any back payments.
While I can appreciate your frustrations, in line with all personnel in the Army, you have a Military Secretary Division (MS) to which you can turn for assistance.
Therefore, while I encourage you to use the chain of command, please also avail yourself of the services of MS Reserves Division if you are struggling to obtain appropriate career advice.

FUEL ALLOWANCE TOO LOW

THE letters “We only get half RAC mileage rate” and “Insurance is a joke” (both March) made interesting reading. Neither are anything new and having served 23 years I can see both sides of the disagreement.

However Brig Gordon’s response does not explain why motor mileage allowance (MMA) is set so low. When you look at the AA table and what it terms as “total standing charges and running costs in pence”, you see a figure ranging from 24.12 to 195.38 depending on both mileage and standing charges (how much your car cost, insurance, etc).

When you look at this you will see the insurance is between £400 and £900, which falls way short of Mrs Turner’s quotes of £1,700.

Petrol in the AA figures was £1.04 a litre, now £1.12 and rising. Factor in the average cost of insurance with the average age of military drivers – the problem as highlighted by Mrs Turner – you will be amazed at how often soldiers pay more than £1,000 for insurance on a basic car.

I have been driving for 22 years and have full no claims and still pay more than £400 a year on a family car (Insurance group 11).

As an ageing soldier about to retire, I agree with Brig Gordon that the money received is only meant to contribute to the costs, and not cover them completely. But again, I would say that this is hardly contributing much when it is clear not only from the AA site but also from the RAC and Fleet News that what is received is well below the actual full running costs.

When you add the additional insurance paid by young Service people, it could do with a revamp to bring it into line with our civilian counterparts, who often get more than 56p a mile. I think the complex algorithm, alluded to by Brig Gordon, should be better explained and where possible broken down to show the readers why they are getting so little.

I also think the data used in the current MMA rates was set many years ago and, as with most financial matters in the Army, we see the results many years after they were originally intended, thus making them out of date. – CSgt B Rogers, 158 Transport Squadron RLC.

BFPO’S NEPAL SERVICE DOESN’T DELIVER

I AM serving in Nepal and my family and I depend heavily on the British Forces postal system to provide everything that we need from the UK.

Nepalese shops have a poor selection of basics, children’s items and clothes, so most of these have to be mail-ordered, or posted by friends and family through the BFPO system.

The standard of service has been shocking over the six months I have been in post. While some parcels arrive within two weeks, others take months.

My wife recently received a parcel signed for by Northolt (or probably Mill Hill at the time) on November 27 last year. We got it two and a half months later. A colleague had similar problems when a parcel took three months to arrive, having first been to the US and then Lisbon. It contained nappies and baby food that cannot be sourced locally.

These are two examples from dozens.

I was recently in our post office and was astonished by the amount of misdirected mail (largely intended for BFPO 2) that had been received. I was told this occurs with every delivery.

I am sure the BFPO sorting office is very busy, and they undoubtedly do a sterling job supporting our colleagues on operational deployments (which I have benefited from during my eight operational tours). However, it’s not all that difficult to get it right. Compared to a Royal Mail sorting office BFPO has an easy time with the limited (in comparison) number of destination addresses to get their heads around.

The MoD wastes a fortune sending mail halfway across the globe, just to send it halfway back to the UK and then halfway in the other direction to the right place.

Our postie tells me that when he worked at Mill Hill every bag was double-checked before dispatch, something that has been done away with, probably as a time and cost saving measure. I don’t think that you could get a better example of MoD penny-pinching ultimately resulting in higher costs. – Name and address supplied.

Col Douglas Cook, Colonel Operations, BFPO, responds: All members of staff in the British Forces Post Office are sorry to hear that a soldier is dissatisfied with the mail service to Nepal. Civilian and military members of BFPO work extremely hard to provide a first-class service to all Service and other entitled personnel and their families.
BFPO’s move to new automated facilities in Northolt in November 2007 has enabled it to further enhance the quality of service provided and implement a regime of continuous improvement.
Over the past six months BFPO has been supporting a free service to operational theatres, which has resulted in a 27 per cent overall increase in operational mail volumes. Clearly, this has placed significant pressure on the BFPO, the wider Defence joint supply chain and postal units in operational theatres.
However, services to Nepal have been largely unaffected by the increase in operational mail volumes.
BFPO consider that Nepal receives an excellent mail service. It dispatches parcels (three times a week) and letters (five times a week) by air to Kathmandu on Thailand airlines. Under its Service Level Agreement with HQ Land, BFPO has a pipeline time of up to eight weeks for delivery of parcel mail to Nepal, predicated on a surface distribution.
As part of its wider performance management regime, BFPO runs a test letter system to Nepal which reveals letter mail is taking five days to arrive in Nepal from BFPO London, although there is always the possibility that in-theatre customs issues can impact on delivery times.
BFPO is currently working with Thailand Airways to achieve more evenly distributed outlets during the week to further improve the quality of service for parcel mail.
BFPO is unable to comment on the in-theatre mail distribution as this is a HQ British Ghurka Nepal responsibility, but it should take no longer than 24 hours. Letter mail sent from UK addresses to BFPO through the Royal Mail system with a first class stamp will normally take 24 hours to arrive.
Parcel mail from UK addresses can be moved by a variety of couriers using different services and tariffs, delivery times can range from less than 24 hours to five days.
All mail is processed as quickly as possible after receipt in BFPO London. Therefore, assuming letter mail is sent with a first-class stamp, letters should take less than seven days to arrive in Nepal.
Clearly, in addition to a swift and secure mail system, BFPO strives to deliver an accurate and reliable service. Indeed, since September 2007, BFPO’s mis-sort rate averages at only .09 per cent of the total mail volumes handled. In the past six months, in addition to the two reported mis-sorts mentioned by the soldier, where mail was incorrectly dispatched to Washington and Naples, BFPO has received only one other irregularity report – mail meant for Nepal sent to the wrong destination.
BFPO continues to improve processes to reduce such mis-sorts, but to a large extent its increased reliance on automation to sort mail relies on senders of mail properly addressing mail in line with postal guidance available from BFPO’s web-site or British Forces Post Offices.
Importantly, the last line of the address should be the BFPO number, not the country or theatre of operations.
The soldier suggests that staff within BFPO have an easy time compared to personnel working in Royal Mail. This is not the case; over the last six months BFPO has dealt with nearly 11.75 million items of mail, approximately 64,500 items a day. It dispatches different types of mail, each with different handling characteristics and security considerations to more than 578 locations. It relies on a complex mix of military and commercial distribution assets for delivery to destination each of which require careful and detailed coordination.
BFPO works extremely hard to ensure that all Service and other entitled personnel and their families receive a first-class mail service within the constraints of a complex supply chain involving a variety of organisations. Clearly, there is always room for improvement but BFPO believes its new automated facility in Northolt provides the opportunity to deliver continuous improvement and enhance the quality of its services.

On course to lose out

MY pay clerk has told me that I will lose my operational allowance (OA) for the time I was on a course in the United Kingdom that I did not ask for.

It was an operational requirement but through no fault of my own I will lose my allowance. – Cpl Lough, Op Telic 11.

Brig Jamie Gordon, DPS(A), responds: The aim of the operational allowance is to recognise the significantly increased and enduring nature of the danger in specified operational locations above that compensated for by X-factor.
If you are not in Iraq, you are not enduring the risk and rigour, therefore no OA. Unlucky, but it seems fair to me.

Free ranger?

A DEFENCE Intranet article entitled “Chickens given refuge at military farm” made me wonder if the MoD has a view on whether free-range chickens should be served in messes and soldiers’ restaurants? Although I eat in them, I don’t have a say in purchasing, but with all the coverage of animal welfare, perhaps we should start asking where our food comes from. – LCpl G Whittaker, 10 Regiment QOGLR.

TA uniform grant put me in wrong

AS a civil servant working in a Territorial Army regiment, I was instructed to process a uniform grant to a newly commissioned officer because JPA was unable to pay it.

After days of research I found a figure of £2,122 in the regulations, which state that the grant is for Regular officers but makes no mention of a different rate for the TA.

My warrant officer and I both concluded that there could only be one figure. But after paying the officer, I was given a copy of a notice dated 1994 stating that the sum should have been £378 and the SPS chain of command confirmed that this was correct.

I had to tell the officer to repay the difference.
Why are the different rates not published together? Surely no one is expected to remember a figure first promulgated more than ten years ago? It’s also a surprise to learn that it has not kept up with inflation. Please publish this to warn others new to the TA who may also fall into this hole. – Name and address supplied.

Deepcut tribute

I AM not sure if the Piscator cartoon in the February issue was supposed to be funny, but I am sure I’m not the only reader sad to see Deepcut go.

As a 21-year-old RAOC TA recruit I did two weeks’ basic training there in the late 1980s (as well as many training weekends) and have fond memories of the barracks. Our training staff were hard but fair and I made some great mates among fellow recruits.

I was sorry to hear of the deaths at the barracks, but this shouldn’t detract from the fine work done there and the enjoyable experience for the vast majority of soldiers based there. Personally, I think the stigma is unfair.

Perhaps we could have some recognition of this in Soldier before the barracks are demolished. – David Strong, Belvedere, Kent.

JPA left me with no leave

HOW can anyone say that JPA has hit the ground running with only a few minor quirks and keep a straight face? Certainly no clerks I know think so.

My pay was messed up and I didn’t go up an increment until I chased the problem. Then I had to sort out the back pay as a separate issue.

I didn’t bother chasing the difference in pay for the month of March 2007, as it is just not worth the grey hairs to try to get details from the old system.

Then I tried to sign off. Even the HR specialists couldn’t sort that out, so I signed off on the old system and nearly messed up my resettlement plans in the process.

Finally, I applied for four days’ annual leave but was told that I had to fill out a leave pass as well, so what was the point? But wait, it gets better. This should have brought my total leave taken to 14 days. When I next checked, I had no days left.

After many attempts to amend my entitlement, with no help from the JPAC help desk, I apparently still have no annual leave left. – Name and address supplied.

SIMPLE SOLUTION TO MILEAGE ALLOWANCE DEBATE

I HAVE been following the debate concerning the perceived low level of motor mileage allowance (MMA) despite the rising cost of motoring. Last month Brig Gordon stated that a complex algorithm was used to calculate the cost of motoring using information from the AA and Glass’s Guide, resulting in a figure of around 25p a mile.

I am often reminded of the need to “Keep it simple, stupid”. I would have thought that complex algorithms should play little part in military life and wonder why the Army doesn’t use the rates established and updated by the Inland Revenue – a nice and simple 40p per mile for the first 10,000 miles claimed. And as we all know, there is no point arguing with the taxman. – Capt Peter Sawyer, 26 Engineer Regiment.

WAR FILM MEDAL, ANYONE?

I READ that Awards Productions are still striking questionable medals – for example the commemorative Cold War medal 1945-1991. At this rate they will soon be running out of ideas so I wonder if the readers could help out their promotions department with suggestions for further gongs?

Here’s mine: a medal should be minted for anyone who has sat through at least three war films on a chair no more than 10ft from the TV. Wound stripes could be awarded if a viewer falls off his seat during an exciting sequence or cuts his hand on a beer can. – Roy Wilson, Liaison Officer, National Service Veterans Association.

CLERKS SHOULDER THE EXTRA BURDEN

I READ with interest Sgt Brooksbank’s plea “Please don’t blame the clerks” (March).

It is true that HR administrators have had their workload nearly doubled with the introduction of JPA. As a lance corporal I have run a rifle company on my own for more than 12 months, a job normally given to two people, one of whom would be a full corporal.

I provide a high-quality service and make sure all the people I am responsible for are paid correctly and have high standards of deployability.

I often work late and most weekends because soldiers are unable to do the simplest of tasks on JPA. My normal working day would, for instance, be showing people how to submit a claim for expenses even though I have put out guides, notice boards and had my systems sergeant give a presentation to the company.

Unicom may be an outdated system but it worked well and it gave control to the clerks.

Clerks have been told for years that they don’t know what they’re doing and now the time has come for the mockers to do it for themselves. We are not to blame for other people’s personal admin. – LCpl D Thomson, HR administrator, 2 R Anglian.

SINGLE, DIVORCED AND UNLOVED

I HAVE been in the Army for 22 years and am angry at the treatment of single and divorced personnel.

I was recently selected for promotion to WO1 and am serving in Northern Ireland.

Because I am divorced I am not entitled to the over-37 package so have to pay full rates. When I was based on the mainland I was entitled to 12 claims on the Get You Home (Stability Allowance) (GYH(SA)). This helped because I own my own house and have a daughter.

But I lost the allowance on moving to Northern Ireland. Yet soldiers in my peer group who are voluntarily posted as married unaccompanied (MU) receive longer separation allowance (LSA), the over-37 package and 12 warrants a years. I’m losing out again.

The law means I cannot change my martial status by entering a civil partnership with a woman because it has to be a same-sex relationship. Where are we going?

I still have a family, I still have a home and I am still over 37 years.With the increased divorce rate within the Army, when are we going to change our attitudes and our rules? – Frustrated soldier.

Brig Jamie Gordon, DPS(A) responds: As a divorced person, I assume Personal Status Category five, you are treated the same as a single person. I agree that you are disadvantaged when compared to a MU in terms of the over-37 package, but the story you tell is not that bad.
You and a MU are eligible for 12 return Northern Ireland journeys a year (these journey equate to the GYH(SA) journeys you previously received.
A married accompanied Service person in Northern Ireland is only eligible for three return family journeys a year. Like any other single man, you have no entitlement to LSA as you have no spouse from which you are voluntarily separated.
With regards to your eligibility to enter into a civil partnership, this is determined by UK legislation, not Service policy.

MISSING OUT ON LEARNING CREDITS

WHEN the window for application into the Enhanced Learning Credits (ELC) scheme was opened in 2004, our chief clerk at the time instigated an application en masse for all unit members.

Despite completing the form I discovered that my application had not registered with the Enhanced Learning Credit Administrative Service (ELCAS) so I can’t benefit because of an administrative error and no fault of my own.

ELCAS advised me to speak to my local education centre and to submit an appeal for late admission. The OC AEC told me she could provide a covering letter, but that I would also need a letter from someone I worked with at the time who was successful in applying.

This isn’t an option because I have long lost contact with the unit.

Why does there needs to be an application process at all.

It would be much simpler and cheaper if serving members were entered automatically, on qualifying, as with Standard Learning Credits. It seems a shame that the people who are trying to improve themselves are being restricted in this way. – Sgt L Greiner, Breaconsfield.

Chris Harwood, ELC Manager, HQ DETS(A), responds: The ELC Scheme was developed soon after the introduction of the government’s ill-fated National Adult Learning Accounts. You may recall that these were withdrawn because they were seriously misused and there was evidence that individuals were not fully committed to life-long learning (one of the main tenets of the national scheme), because they were available unconditionally.
Consequently, when the ELC scheme was introduced there was clear ministerial direction that individuals had to demonstrate their early commitment to personal development and through-career learning. To meet this direction the scheme requires registration during a specific period, currently set in the first 12 months of service in an individual’s career.
Individuals are made aware of this requirement to register towards the end of phase one or at the early stages of phase two training and virtually everybody does now register at that point.
Individuals serving during the initial registration window of April 1, 2003–March 31, 2004 were strongly encouraged to register via unit briefings, a media campaign and notices posted on individual pay statements.
After this point individuals had a second opportunity to register at the eight to eight-and-half year point if they failed to register earlier. It is recognised that due to the operational tempo at this time some personnel will have been unable to register, or, due to the additional administrative burden an error occurred, resulting in applications not arriving at the ELCAS for processing.
Personnel who feel that they fall into either of these categories should submit a case through their IERO with documentary evidence backing up their case. It should include a statement from the unit at the time in question. As this is a Defence scheme all three Services have to apply the same strict criteria for late registration requests. If an individual cannot acquire certain pieces of evidence this should be highlighted in their submission.