RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-05718
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED: NO

	 

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His debt from receiving overpayment of Basic Allowance of 
Housing (BAH) be reversed.

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His demotion paperwork was signed on 8 Aug 12; however, it was 
not updated until 18 Sep 12 and his rank was reflected in the 
Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) incorrectly until Oct 
12.  He would like the overpayment debt to be reversed due to 
the fact that it took over two months before it was updated in 
MilPDS.  He should not be punished because it took personnel a 
long time to update the system.  

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of the 
Demotion Action Memorandum, a copy of a special order, a 
printout of the applicant’s debt, and copies of his Leave and 
Earning Statements.

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the Regular 
Air Force in the grade of senior airman.

According to the AFPC/DPSOE advisory opinion, the applicant was 
arrested for driving under the influence on 5 Feb 12.  On 5 Jun 
12, the applicant was notified that he was being 
administratively demoted for failure to fulfill NCO 
responsibilities.  On 11 Jun 12, the Area Defense Counsel 
requested a delay in responding and it was approved.  The 
commander denied the applicant’s request not to demote him; the 
applicant was notified of this action on 25 Jun 12.  On 3 Aug 
12, the Staff Judge Advocate provided a legal review and 
determined there were no errors or irregularities affecting the 
legal sufficiency of the demotion action.  Effective 8 Aug 12, 
the applicant was demoted to the rank of senior airman with a 
new date of rank (DOR) of 8 Aug 12.  The MilPDS was updated on 
11 Oct 12.  

DPSOE contacted the servicing Military Personnel Squadron (MPS) 
to find out why the system was not updated until three weeks 
after the demotion order was published.  The MPS responded by 
stating the updates were made when the package was received.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of 
the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C and D.

________________________________________________________________
_

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOE does not provide a recommendation.  They do not have 
the authority to decide pay issues.  However, they note the 
applicant was notified by his commander of the demotion to 
senior airman and that the effective date would be 8 Aug 12 
regardless of when the update was made in MilPDS.  

The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

DFAS-IN recommends denial.  The applicant was duly notified of 
the demotion and was given the opportunity to plead his case.  
There was no reason for the applicant not to be prepared for the 
reduction in his pay whether it was posted in August or October.

The complete DFAS evaluation is at Exhibit D.  

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 18 Apr 13 for review and comment within 30 days.  
As of this date, this office has received no response.

________________________________________________________________
_

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 Defense Finance and Accounting Service-Indianapolis 
(DFAS-IN), and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion that 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 to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application.

________________________________________________________________
_

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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-05718 in Executive Session on 12 Sep 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Nov 12, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 30 Jan 13.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, DFAS-IN, undated.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Apr 13.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair