PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:             9 March 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999028385

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Walter Avery, Jr.		                       Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. June Hajjar		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas D. Howard, Jr.		Member	
	Ms. Carol Jo Suiter		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that the finding of financial liability against him be overturned and that all money already seized be refunded.

3.  The applicant states that he is being charged for exceeding his weight limit for household goods.  He contends he received orders re-assigning him from Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland to Fort Irwin, California with a reporting date of 12 April 1996.  On 4 January 1997 he married and then arranged to have his household goods shipped on 6 January 1997 from Florida to California.  He feels the weight allowance should have been increased to the higher limits of a military member with dependents.  He separated from the service on 21 August 1998 without receiving any notice from transportation or finance that he had exceeded the weight and had a debt.  Because his weight allowance as a single person was 1500 pounds and he had shipped over 4000 pounds the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) instituted a collection for $1433.32.

4.  In support of his request, he has provided a copy of his marriage certificate, a bill of lading from the transportation company and the series of letters between himself and DFAS seeking relief from the debt.

5.  The applicant’s military records show that he entered the Regular Army on    22 August 1985, achieved pay grade E-4 and was separated honorably on        21 August 1998.

6.  Joint Travel Regulation Volume 1 provides, in pertinent part, that when a member is entitled to transportation and/or storage of household goods.  A member’s weight allowance depends on the member’s grade and dependency status.  The prescribed weight allowance without dependents for an E-1 – E2 is 1500 pounds. The regulation further states members are not entitled to dependent’s travel and transportation allowances when a dependent is not a dependent on the effective date of the permanent change of station orders.  
The applicant at the time of shipment was an E3, but the weight allowance for shipment was still based on his rank (E2) at the time the initial movement orders were issued.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s orders authorizing the move were issued 23 February 1996, he was married on 4 January 1997, and his household goods were picked up less than 48 hours later on 6 January.  The applicant did not provide information on what actions he took to make sure the transportation office in Florida or California understood his changed marital status.  The applicant made the wrong presumption that he was authorized additional weight due to marriage and that all possible agencies involved (finance, personnel, transportation etc.) would instantly and automatically update their appropriate records to reflect his new martial status.  
2.  The applicant separated from service on 21 August 1998.  At that time he was not informed of any debt to the government.   The DFAS notified the applicant of his debt and their intent to collect sometime in December 1999 and in several subsequent letters.  None of the later letters addressed the explanation provided by the applicant and more specifically none addressed why if the applicant was married at the time of the shipment DFAS continues to hold the debt as valid.  The inability of DFAS to identify debt in a timely manner and not prepare personalized, informative correspondence placed unnecessary hardship on the applicant.

3.  It is also noted that at the time of the shipment the applicant was a PFC serving on his first enlistment and was certainly unfamiliar with the regulations and procedures concerning shipment of household goods.  Therefore in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate to excuse any indebtedness to the government. 

4.  In view of the foregoing, the interest of justice would best be served by correcting the applicant’s records as an exception to policy as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by:

	a.  excusing his indebtedness to the government; and

	b.  returning to him any monies already collected in payment of the debt.

BOARD VOTE:  

_jh _____  _tdh_____  _cjs ____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_______June Hajjar_________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028385	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000309	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	128.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.