RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00974 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive payment for Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) for Atlanta, Georgia from 21 Oct 04 through 27 Jan 05 for the duration of the Communications Computer Operations Career Field (AFSC 3C0X1) technical training course at Keesler AFB, Mississippi. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He did not receive full BAH during the time he retrained into Combat Communications and attended technical training at Keesler AFB, Mississippi. He inquired and was told he was not due the full amount of BAH. However, he retrained again in 2012 and was then paid the full amount of BAH, which is when he discovered the error. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of Staff Sergeant (E-5). According to documentation provided by the applicant, on 19 Mar 13, he requested similar relief via the Case Management System (CMS). On 26 Mar 13, Defense Finance & Accounting Service (DFAS) denied his request, indicating that due to the length of time that had passed since the events under review, the applicant would not be entitled to the pay he sought because, in accordance with Barring Act (31 U.S.C. § 3702(b), the request must be received within six years of the date the claim accrued. (A claim accrues on the date when everything necessary to give rise to the claim has occurred). According to documentation provided by the applicant, he submitted an inquiry through his the Congressional Representative pertaining to the matter under review. DFAS provided a response indicating that according to his pay records, the applicant received the correct BAH rate for a single member in training status during the period in question. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AF/A1PA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. During the applicant’s initial technical training course conducted at Keesler AFB, MS for the period of 21 Oct 04 through 27 Jan 05, his Master Military Pay Account (MMPA) shows the number of dependents as zero, identifying the member as single for purposes of BAH. In addition, the Quota Report (OTA) also identifies his marital status as “S” for single. In order to furnish a thorough assessment of the facts and attest to the accuracy of the payments made to the applicant, additional supporting documentation and an accurate determination of facts for the period in question will need to be provided by the applicant. The following supporting documents are required to make a reasoned determination with respect to the applicant’s claim: 1) Orders (referred to as “travel orders” to Keesler AFB for the course (Oct 04 – Jan 05), including amendments) for 2004 E3ABR3C031 course; 2) travel orders and corresponding payment vouchers for 2012 E3ABR3D031 and E3AQR3D031 courses; and 3) documentation of his entry into the Air Force Reserve component. A complete copy of the AF/A1PA evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant submitted a copy of his record of duty status that is contained in his Personnel Tempo (PERSTEMPO) and Tempo Management Tracking System found in the Virtual Military Personnel Flight (VMPF) which shows he was in a duty status 22, meaning he was TDY to school on dates 20 Oct 04 through 28 Jan 05, verifying he was TDY during the period in question. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. 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, to include his rebuttal response, 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. We note the comments of the Air Force OPR indicating that due to the passage of time since the events in question, a conclusive determination cannot be made regarding the applicant’s claim unless and until he is able to provide additional documentary evidence. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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 issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 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-2014-00974 in Executive Session on 19 Feb 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Oct 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, HQ AF/A1PA, dated 3 Apr 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 14. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 3 Sep 14.