Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013472
Original file (20130013472.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  1 April 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130013472 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests back pay for Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS) for the period 1 October 2012 to 31 January 2013.

2.  The applicant states:

* he was without a meal card for the period October 2012 to January 2013
* he was unable to eat at the dining facility, but meal deductions were taken from his pay check
* he turned in the DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) in December 2012, but his commander never did anything   

3.  The applicant provides:

* Leave and Earnings Statements (LESs)
* DA Form 4187

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 September 2008 and trained as an infantryman.  He served in Afghanistan from 18 June 2010 to 16 June 2011.  



2.  He provides a DA Form 4187, dated 27 March 2013, which shows a request to stop meal deductions and back pay was initiated.  This form states the applicant had been getting meal deductions since October 2012 without being issued a meal card.    

3.  He provides LESs covering the period 1 October 2012 through 31 December 2012 which show meal deductions were taken from his pay. 

4.  On 14 January 2013, he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD).

5.  A staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Compensation and Entitlements Division, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, in the processing of this case who states:

	a.  The applicant is entitled to receive BAS for the period 1 October 2012 through 14 January 2013.

	b.  Title 37, U.S. Code, section 402, entitles all enlisted Soldiers, other than those in initial entry training, to receive BAS.

	c.  Based on the documents furnished with this case, the applicant's commander verified he was not issued a meal card; therefore, he was not authorized to eat in the dining facility without paying out of pocket.  As a result, the Army charged him twice for the meals he consumed. 

6.  A copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for comment and possible rebuttal.  He did not respond within the given timeframe.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence shows the applicant was not issued a meal card for the period 
1 October 2012 through 14 January 2013, but meal deductions were taken from his pay. 

2.  Although the applicant requests back pay for BAS for the period 1 October 2012 to 31 January 2013, the evidence shows he was REFRAD on 14 January 2013.  

3.  Since the Army charged him twice for the meals he consumed during the period 1 October 2012 through 14 January 2013, and in accordance with the recommendation from the advisory official, the applicant is entitled to BAS for the period 1 October 2012 through 14 January 2013.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X___  ____X___  ___X__ _  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing he was authorized BAS for the period 1 October 2012 through 
14 January 2013 and paying him back pay for BAS.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented was insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to receiving BAS for the period 15 January 2013 through 31 January 2013.  




      _______ _  X ______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130013472





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130013472



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008973

    Original file (20080008973.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Shortly after his separation, his former battalion commander issued a memorandum to the servicing Finance Office authorizing a by-name list of those Soldiers who performed shift work and were entitled to BAS, to receive the higher COLA rate. Army Regulation 37-104-4 states that COLA is a tax free allowance given to active duty military members living in high cost areas outside of the CONUS. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018518

    Original file (20130018518.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides various medical records, pay records, AWOL documents, several self-authored statements, and internet articles. Included is a memorandum issued by the U.S. Army Medical Department Activity, Fort Hood, TX, dated 2 April 2012, which states the applicant "would benefit from continuing a low sodium, no pork diet for her medical condition." a. Paragraph 14-27 states that commanders of active Army are responsible for initiating a FLIPL when property issued from a CIF...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068545C070402

    Original file (2002068545C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. the applicant for one. The OER was a "Relief for Cause" OER that referred to multiple incidents where the applicant took meals in the Battalion Dining...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001281

    Original file (20120001281.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    She stated, in part: * in May 2010, after completing an online application, she was issued a GTC prior to attending DSS * on 19 May 2010, she was granted a divorce * her agreement with her former spouse was that he would take care of their children until she finished training * DSS began on 8 June 2010, and she provided her GTC during in-processing for Army Lodging * in June, her former spouse decided he didn't want to care for their children any longer and dropped them off with her * around...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058527C070421

    Original file (2001058527C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states, in effect, that the subject ROS was initiated 8 months after he was relieved of his duties as Brigade Food Service Officer (FSO) on 4 February 1997; that his replacement noted a discrepancy in March 1997 when attempting to reconcile DD Forms 1544 (Cash Meal Payment Sheet, or Cash Sheets), but took no action until 7 months later; that his replacement assumed responsibility for Brigade food service operations and all Cash Sheets; that the non-commissioned officer (NCO)...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002827

    Original file (20130002827.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 to show his rank/grade as sergeant (SGT)/E-5 and his date of rank (DOR) as 9 July 1979. However, Orders Number 079-01, issued by the CAARNG, on 19 March 2000 show he was reduced from SGT to SPC with a DOR of 9 July 1979 due to inefficiency in accordance with National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management), paragraph 11-60. The applicant indicated he was reduced from the rank of SGT to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130022397,

    Original file (20130022397,.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant adds that the Article 15 clearly stated that the portion of the punishment pertaining to the reduction in grade was suspended. After information is verified on the DA Form 5110, supporting finance documentation showing execution of the reduction or forfeitures, as well as the verification of OMPF filings by the OMPF custodian will be retained for 2 years after the date the punishment was imposed. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130022397

    Original file (20130022397.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant adds that the Article 15 clearly stated that the portion of the punishment pertaining to the reduction in grade was suspended. After information is verified on the DA Form 5110, supporting finance documentation showing execution of the reduction or forfeitures, as well as the verification of OMPF filings by the OMPF custodian will be retained for 2 years after the date the punishment was imposed. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018503

    Original file (20130018503.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    p. A DA Form 1559 (IG Action Request), dated 22 April 2008, the applicant submitted for an investigation into why his original orders were for PCS and not TDY for his 179 days and why it was not amended in time and payment for his 10 days AT in January 2008. q. The evidence of record shows the applicant, while already on orders for 98 days, was issued ADT PCS orders for 179 days. Therefore, he is not entitled to amendment of his PCS orders.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060016093

    Original file (20060016093.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record confirms the applicant was entitled to a COLA rate with an index of "0" during the time period 1 August 2004 through 31 March 2005, and that he received payment at that index rate. It also contains a Memorandum from the applicant's unit commander, which provided the names of those Soldiers of the unit who were entitled to a change to their COLA rate from "9" to "0" due to shift work while residing in the barracks. The applicant's name is not included on this list and...