RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03780
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to allow payment for temporary duty
(TDY) expenses he incurred while on active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was called to active duty for training from 14 Jul through
30 Sep 10, and then from 1 Oct 10 through 14 Apr 11. He was not
aware he would not be authorized per diem since his orders
reflected he was in a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) status.
As a result, he has incurred a $3,800.00 debt on his government
travel card (GTC).
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of AF
Forms 938, Request and Authorization for Active Duty Training/
Active Duty Tours, DD Forms 1351-2, Travel Voucher or Subvoucher,
Standard Form 1164, Claim for Reimbursement for Expenditures on
Official Business.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 29 Aug 08, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve as
an airman first class (A1C) for six years.
The applicant was initially ordered to active duty for training
from 12 Jul 10 through 30 Sep 10 by order number D45GG2. The
orders authorized Temporary Duty (TDY) entitlements. He was
reimbursed for TDY entitlement, to include lodging in the amount
of $19,474.44.
The applicant was ordered to active duty training for an
additional 196 days from 1 Oct 10 through 14 Apr 11 on order
number D493YE. The orders authorized Permanent Change of Station
(PCS) allowances versus TDY allowances.
When the applicant filed his voucher for lodging expense for
order number D493YE it was denied.
On 21 Jan 11, the applicants unit submitted an SF 1164 seeking
reimbursement for the applicant, indicating the applicant was
never informed of the change in his entitlements, and taking full
responsibility for this. The request was denied.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the
Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFRC/FMP recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an
error or injustice. The applicant and his unit were aware the
training was to be performed in PCS status. The member should
have been ordered to perform a PCS on one order for the entire
tour of duty from 12 Jul 10 through 14 Apr 11 because the entire
active duty training tour was over 139 days. However, the unit
published separate, but continuous orders (perhaps due to fiscal
year concerns) and the entitlements of the first order were paid
accordingly. The second order, then, was published and placed
the member in the correct PCS status. The applicants signature
on the travel order acknowledges he was aware of the contents of
the order.
The complete AFRC/FMP evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 10 Sep 12 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office (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 agree with the opinion and
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought.
______________________________________________________________
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-2011-03780 in Executive Session on 31 Oct 12, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Dec 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/FMP, dated 7 Sep 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Sep 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03022
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03022 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be reimbursed $1,293.13 to offset Temporary Lodging Expenses (TLE) incurred with her Permanent Change of Station (PCS) assignment to Ramstein Air Base (AB), Germany. A request was submitted to the Secretary of the Air Force Financial...
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant’s counsel responded to the Air Force evaluation and indicates that he and the applicant believe that the documents presented by the applicant establish that a clear injustice occurred when the applicant received an Article 15 for allegedly being derelict in the performance of his duties. Counsel’s complete response is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03231
While she received orders for three of her TDYs related to her MEB processing, she traveled under the verbal orders of her commander to attend her last MEB appointment during the period 27 Mar 12 through 03 Apr 12, but has yet to receive TDY orders or travel reimbursement. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that during the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03939
_________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ USAF/DPRCE noted that during his activation, the applicant received TDY entitlements in accordance with the JFTR. HQ USAF/DPRCE also noted the applicant submitted 15 accrual (advance) vouchers, none of which reflected the trips back to Stanhope. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03940
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 6 Feb 04 for review and response. The evidence of record indicates that during his activation, and while in a TDY status, the applicant made several trips from Willow Grove ARS to his home in Allentown, PA. Also during his activation, he submitted a number of interim travel vouchers, none of which reflected his trips...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-00784
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00784 INDEX CODE 128.14 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reimbursed for the cost of airline tickets self-procured outside the Traffic Management Office (TMO)/Contractor Travel Office (CTO) for a permanent change of station (PCS) from Maxwell AFB, AL to Altus AFB, OK with a Permissive...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00784 INDEX CODE 128.14 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reimbursed for the cost of airline tickets self-procured outside the Traffic Management Office (TMO)/Contractor Travel Office (CTO) for a permanent change of station (PCS) from Maxwell AFB, AL to Altus AFB, OK with a Permissive...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120018884
The applicant requests correction of his record to show he was on temporary duty (TDY) travel orders on the days he traveled to Modesto, CA during the period 14 February 2011 to 16 February 2012. The applicant's request that he be placed on TDY travel orders for those days he traveled to and from Sacramento, CA to Modesto, CA during the period 14 February 2011 to 16 February 2012 and that he be reimbursed for corresponding travel completed and for per diem if authorized was carefully...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02325
HQ AFRC/JAR recommends denial of the applicants request for credit of one travel day following completion of his active duty tour at Ramstein AB, Germany ending in Oct 2009. JAR states the applicant was directed to end his tour and complete his travel from Ramstein AB, Germany within the dates of the tour (1 to 31 Oct 2009). Although the applicant has provided evidence that he travelled after the end dates of his order, other than his own uncorroborated assertions, he has not provided any...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001051454C070420
He also concluded that no reimbursement exists because there was no evidence of “official” travel supported by official orders for the period of time the applicant was attached for duty at Fort Bragg. k. The DOHA, based on Comptroller General decisions and provisions of the JFTR, denied the applicant reimbursement for per diem for the period the applicant was attached and was present at Fort Bragg because it was determined to be disciplinary travel. c. Notwithstanding the determination...