RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04558 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) payment for the period from 15 June 2010 through 07 December 2010. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was denied BAH payments for the period during basic military training (BMT) and while he was a technical training school pipeline student. The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) stated that he lived at his uncle’s home during that timeframe. This was incorrect as evidenced by amended orders he received from his unit subsequent to the DOHA ruling. After the DOHA ruling, he discovered the unit finance office had his original enlistment documents proving he changed his address, but they never processed them nor informed the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) offices and DOHA of this fact. This led to the erroneous DOHA ruling. Because of this error and the false contention that he did not provide proof that he was paying his rent for the period from 15 June 2010 through 07 December 2010, he was denied BAH. After he discovered the overlooked enlistment documents and following the DOHA ruling, his wing commander gave a directive for the BMT order to be amended and directed the finance office to review his BAH claim but they never reviewed his claim. In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement as well as copies of documents extracted from his military personnel records and other supporting documents. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Air National Guard on 9 March 2010. He is currently serving in the grade of senior airman (SrA) E-4. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: USAF/A1PA recommends denial. A1PA states the applicant’s application is not supported by convincing evidence that he had a continuing obligation to pay rent to his cousin from the time he was called to BMT and technical training school in June 2010 through December 2010. His cousin’s tax record excerpt does not, on its face, show any reference that the applicant was, in fact, the source of a rental payment that he reported. Additionally the “Rental Contract” document reflects an amount of “$xxx.xx.” This contract fails to specify any amount for rent. The USAA letter showing account transfers is dated 27 April 2011 and references variable account numbers and amounts. There is insufficient documentation in the record to prove the owner of the account and the purpose of the various transferred amounts. Additionally, transfer amounts vary between July 2010 and December 2010 and there is no evidence regarding purpose of the transfers. The complete USAF/A1PA evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In a letter dated 12 October 2012 the applicant states his case has been ongoing for several years and the findings from his request to obtain DFAS and DOHA rulings show he had a valid rental contract and, therefore, was obligated to pay rent as the regulation requires. He further states he is not sure why USAF/A1PA’s advisory claims he was not obligated to pay rent because he provided a valid contract as evidence of having to pay rent. He cites the email messages sent to his unit finance office and copies of his rental contracts as confirmation that he needed to maintain his apartment because of his rental agreement and the fact that his personal property was there in the apartment. He planned to return to his apartment after he completed training. The advisory statement that his rental contract did not have a dollar amount listed on it was only true of the last of three rental contracts. He provided two contracts, with rental fees listed, to the unit finance office as well as DFAS and DOHA. He accidentally submitted a contract without the rental fee right before he departed to basic training. He, his landlord, and his agent who is also his aunt have provided rental contracts, tax records and signed statements to prove he paid rent while away at training. He had a valid contract, a need for the apartment and it was allowed by regulation. The applicant’s complete response, 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 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The Board agrees with the OPR that the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence that he had a continuing obligation to pay rent. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ 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 this application BC-2011-04558 in Executive Session on 1 November 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 November 2011, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, USAF/A1PA, dated 21 September 2012. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 September 2012. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 October 2012, w/atchs. Panel Chair