From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:     Secretary of the Navy 
 
Subj:   REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO   
 
Ref:   (a) Title 10 U.S.C. § 1552 
 (b) OPNAVINST 7220.12 of 24 Dec 05 
 
Encl:   (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments 
        (2) Subject’s naval record 
 
1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that his naval record be corrected to show Petitioner was authorized Basic Allowance for Housing Differential (BAH-Diff) from 1 May 2012 to present. 
                                              
2.  The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 10 December 2020 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 
 
3.  The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows:   
 
     a.  Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. 
 
     b.  In accordance with reference (b) single members who pay child support and who do not reside in government quarters within the United States are authorized BAH with dependents based on payment of child support.  (These members were authorized to receive BAH single and BAH-DIFF prior to 1 January 2006).  Furthermore, single members who pay child support and are residing overseas are entitled to OHA with dependents based on payment of child support.  Their OHA shall be calculated using the full with-dependents ceiling compared to their rent (instead of the 90 percent ceiling) and they shall receive the full utility allowance instead of the 75 percent level (These members were authorized to receive OHA single and BAH-diff prior to 1 January 2006). Finally, single members who pay child support and who are assigned to government quarters are authorized to receive BAH Diff only. 
 
     c.  On 5 July 2007, Petitioner entered active duty. 

     d.  On 19 September 2008, Petitioner arrived to for duty. 
 
     e.  On 1 May 2012, Petitioner’s child was born. 
 
     f.  On 22 September 2012, Petitioner transferred, and on 19 October 2012, Petitioner arrived to  for duty. 
 
     g.  On 16 October 2012, petition for declaration of paternity under the Missouri uniform parentage act and petition for an order of custody, visitation and support was filed.  The parties have agreed that father shall pay mother the sum of $350.00 per month for support of the minor child. 
 
     h.  On 21 May 2013, a judgment and declaration of paternity and order of custody, visitation and support was filed, where the respondent (Child’s mother) shall be awarded a judgment against the Petitioner (Petitioner’s child, by and through her next friend, , and Petitioner, ) in the amount of $600.00 per month for the support of the minor child, with the first payment due on the 1st day of June, 2013, and continuing on the 1st day of each month thereafter for the care and support of said minor child.  Furthermore, that respondent shall be awarded a judgment against the Petitioner in the sum of $2,225.00 for retroactive child support from 1 November 2012. 
 
     i.  On 17 September 2015, Petitioner got married. 
 
     j.  On 25 April 2016, Motion to modify judgment order for custody, visitation, tax dependency credit and child support was filed.    
 
     k.  On 16 March 2017, Petitioner was advanced to E-6. 
 
     l.  On 2 May 2017, a judgment of modification (21 May 2013) was filed.  The court finds that the presumed correct child support amount to be paid by Petitioner to Respondent, is calculated to be $1,059.00 per month and said sum is rebutted as being unjust and inappropriate. 
 
     m.  On 2 June 2017, Petitioner transferred, and on 26 July 2017, Petitioner arrived to  for duty.  
                                
CONCLUSION 
 
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and especially in light of the contents of enclosure (2), the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action.  The Board concluded that since Petitioner was paying child support including retroactive child support in an amount that far exceeded the minimum for BAH-Diff, he qualified for BAH-Diff from the date of his child’s birth instead of from 1 November 2012, as stipulated by the court order.  
 
 
 
RECOMMENDATION 
 
That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected, where appropriate, to show that: 
 
Petitioner submitted his BAH-Diff request shortly after his child’s birth and it was approved by cognizant authority. 
 
Petitioner was authorized BAH-Diff from 1 May 2012 to 16 September 2015, day prior to his marriage.  
 
Note:  Defense Finance & Accounting Service (DFAS) will complete an audit of Petitioner’s records to determine if Petitioner is due any back pay and allowances.  
                                                             
A copy of this Report of Proceedings will be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. 
 
4.  It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 
 
5.  Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)), and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of the reference, has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.