Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00873
Original file (BC 2014 00873.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00873
			COUNSEL:  NONE
			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receive increased Basic Allowance of Housing (BAH) and per diem 
for the time period he was deployed.  


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His first set of orders dated 1 Oct 04 to 16 Feb 05, tasked him to 
support OPERATION NOBEL EAGLE AEF, at Andrews AFB, (AAFB) MD 
(113th ANG) from his ANG unit in Middletown, PA (193rd ANG).  
Subsequent amendments to the orders extended the duty period to 1 
Jul 05.  

In Jul 06 he transferred as a traditional guardsman from his 
residence in Middletown, PA to AAFB and was told he would have to 
rent lodging near AAFB.  

On 19 Oct 06, he was tasked to support OPERATION NOBEL EAGLE at 
AAFB from his residence in Mannassas, VA between 23 Oct 06 and 30 
Sep 07. 

On 17 Oct 07, he was tasked to support Homeland Defense at AAFB MD 
from his residence at Deale, MD between 1 Oct 07 to 31 Dec 07.  He 
was tasked again between 1 Jan 08 to 1 Jun 08.

He believes he should be provided more compensation in the form of 
BAH, per diem and/or separation pay because he had paid rent in 
the new locations though his permanent residence was elsewhere.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 May 88, the applicant enlisted in the Pennsylvania Air 
National Guard.

On 22 Sep 04, he was called to Active Duty (AD), via Special Order 
R5-86 to support OPERATION NOBEL EAGLE from 1 Oct 04 to 16 Feb 05.

Special Order R-N000003 dated 19 Oct 06, assigned him to AAFB from 
23 Oct 06 to 30 Sep 07.  His return address was reflected as 
Manassas, VA.  

Special Order R-N000004, dated 17 Oct 07, tasked him to support 
Homeland Defense from 1 Oct 07 to 31 Dec 07, at AAFB.  His return 
address is listed as Deale, MD.  

Special Order A-N000026 dated 13 Dec 07 again tasked him to 
support Homeland Defense at AAFB from 1 Jan 08 to 1 Jun 08.  His 
return address is listed as Deale, MD.  


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

DFAS-IN recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an 
error or an injustice.  There is no discrepancy between the rates 
due and the rates paid for BAH for the period in question.  
According to the service member’s Master Military Pay Account 
(MMPA), he was paid BAH based on Quantico, VA zip code 20110 and 
Annapolis, MD zip code 20751.

The complete DFAS-IN evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant submitted a response stating that he is not 
disputing that he did not receive the correct pay while he was in 
VA or MD; his only concern is regarding his permanent home 
residency.  He never moved from Pennsylvania although his orders 
reflect otherwise.  His supervisor stated at least two times that 
he needed to have a local address, so that is what he did since 
his responsibility was to the mission.  Home commuting from 
Pennsylvania was not an option because he lived 150 miles away.  
He provides District of Columbia Air National Guard (DCANG) local 
commuting area guidance memorandum 65-01, which reflects locations 
in the local commuting area.  

The applicant’s complete response 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After a 
thorough review of the evidence of record and careful 
consideration of the applicant's contentions, we are not persuaded 
that he has been the victim of an error or injustice.  It appears 
the applicant is not challenging the pay he received while he was 
in MD and VA.  Instead, the applicant states he never moved from 
Pennsylvania and due to the expenses he incurred to support the 
mission he is requesting per diem at $69 a day for 586 days.  
Although the applicant provides his W-2 Forms, Wage and Tax 
Statement 2006, 2007 and 2008, that show taxes were withheld from 
the state of PA, we do not find this evidence presented sufficient 
to prove that his orders were prepared in error or that he should 
be entitled to the requested per diem.  Therefore, we conclude the 
applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof that he has 
been the victim of an error or injustice.  Absent substantial 
evidence that he was denied rights to which he was entitled, we 
find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application.


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 documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-00873 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Mar 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, DFAS-IN, dated 5 Nov 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Nov 14.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009768

    Original file (20130009768.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He provides: * self-authored memoranda, subject: [Applicant], Request for BAH Waiver to Retain BAH at Current Duty Location, dated 20 March 2013 and 10 April 2013 * e-mail correspondence * BAH waiver request template * document entitled Instructions to Obtain a BAH Waiver for PCS * ALARACT 021/2008 * ALARACT 324/2012 * letter, dated 11 March 2013, regarding his son's standing as a student * Officer Record Brief (ORB) * orders * Military Leave and Earnings Statement CONSIDERATION OF...

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00304

    Original file (FD2006-00304.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The records indicated the applicant received an Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge from the Pennsylvania Air National Guard for admitting under oath to numerous violations of the travel regulations which includcd falsifying receipts and submitting fraudulent travel vouchers. Applicant's Issues. About a month later, in February 2004,i was told tbat the commander directed an investigation on my travel voucher I submitted ia November 2004.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2008-02939

    Original file (BC-2008-02939.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/A1K defers to the appropriate office in regards to the applicant’s request for a medical retirement. His left knee injury was recorded as occurring “while in college.” He received periodic non-flying medical...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002872

    Original file (20110002872.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests his basic allowance for housing (BAH) rate be calculated using the rate in effect at his permanent duty station (PDS) vice that in effect at his primary residence location. He was ordered to active duty from Walkersville, MD, near Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD (a distance of 6.78 miles). During his active duty, he received BAH at the "MD 130" [Fort Detrick] rate based on his permanent residence location, not at the higher "DC 053" [Pentagon] rate.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02412

    Original file (BC-2010-02412.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    MRM states that after a review of the available evidence, they note the applicant’s orders were changed by the orders clerk from “will not commute” to “will commute” to allow the applicant to continue on orders until a per diem waiver could be approved. It appears the applicant’s unit erroneously prepared and amended orders before obtaining the required per diem waiver. ____________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02768

    Original file (BC-2011-02768.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    After being successful in reenlisting in the United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR), he subsequently transferred back to his former unit with sufficient retainability for promotion; however, he was still not recommended for promotion. 2) His unit commander took him back on the basis that he would deploy and not be at the unit. However, since he was a member of the Air Force Reserve, the squadron commander of the unit he was assigned to (not the TDY commander) could have recommended him...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015179

    Original file (20130015179.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The JFTR states that when Reserve Component (RC) Soldiers are ordered to active duty and a PCS order is not issued, BAH rate is based on the primary residence location at the time the Soldier was ordered to active duty. However, if the member is called or ordered to active duty and a PCS order is not issued, BAH/OHA rate is based (paid) on the primary residence location at the time called/ordered to active duty"; and c. there is no distinction made in the PPG or JFTR for AGR BAH when the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02407

    Original file (BC-2010-02407.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits B and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PS recommends denial of his request for a retroactive 180-day per diem waiver for the period 29 April 2010 to 31 May 2010. MRM states that after a review of the available evidence, they note the applicant’s orders were...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02816

    Original file (BC-2011-02816.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    If, however, the member's HOR is outside the commuting distance, the member is entitled to per diem and other additional financial benefits. His alleged former girlfriend testified that she did not date the applicant and he never lived at her residence. The complete AF/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He notes that it appears the government, in its advisory opinion addresses...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004737

    Original file (20120004737.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He stated: a. he is a Title 32 AGR Soldier mobilized in support of overseas contingency operations, and requests a Secretarial BAH waiver based upon his previously approved exception to policy to receive BAH at his last duty station of (Adelphi, MD, 20783) due to his command directed No/Low cost move, effective 21 April 2011, to a unit mobilizing within 12 months of his assignment on 30 August 2011; b. effective 21 April 2011, he was transferred to HHC, 29th Combat Aviation Brigade, Edgewood...