MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            21 December 2000  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000042889

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

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		Chairperson	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire		Member	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  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 to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his home of record (HOR) be corrected to reflect 30-B Makisig Street, Quezon City –1114, Philippines vice 8722 Honey Locust Drive, Lavista, Nebraska.

APPLICANT STATES:  He enlisted in the Army on 16 June 1986 and was not asked what his home of record was but rather was only asked where he was currently living.  The address he gave in Lavista, Nebraska was then recorded as his home of record.  He notes that he was “temporarily” living with his sister in Lavista while looking for work.  The applicant states it was always his intention to return to his home in the Philippines.  He states that he was allowed to change his HOR to the Philippines on subsequent reenlistments but on his last reenlistment in March 1999 the reenlistment NCO changed his HOR back to the original Lavista, Nebraska address because Army Regulations only permitted a change in the HOR when there was a break in service and he had no such break.  The applicant notes that he wants to return to the Philippines upon his retirement and the fact that his HOR is now recorded as Lavista, Nebraska will mean that he will only be permitted to return “to Nebraska upon completion of [his] service.”  In support of his request he submits copies of his enlistment and reenlistment contracts.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant was born in Roxas City, Philippines in 1955 and graduated from The Philippine Women’s University in Manila in March 1977.  Between June 1979 and April 1986 he resided at 30 Makisig Street and worked for the Mercury Drug Corporation.

In April 1986 the applicant relocated to the United States for the purpose, as he noted, of securing employment.  During that period he resided at 8722 Honey Locust Drive in Lavista, Nebraska which, according to enlistment documents, was also the address of his mother, a U.S. citizen.

On 16 June 1986 the applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve under the delayed entry program and was ordered to active duty on 10 July 1986 from Lavista, Nebraska.  At the time of his enlistment the applicant’s HOR record was recorded as the Lavista address.  On 1 March 1989 the applicant reenlisted and was permitted to change his HOR address to Quezon City, Philippines.  By the time of his final reenlistment, for an indefinite period, on 11 March 1999, his HOR was recorded as Lavista, Nebraska.

Army Regulation 601-210 provides the policies and procedures for the preparation of enlistment contracts.  It states, in pertinent part, that the HOR address entered on the enlistment contract will be the address declared by the applicant to be their permanent home or actual home at the time of enlistment.  A temporary address will not be entered.
The Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR) provides, in pertinent part, that the HOR is the place recorded as the home of the individual at the time of enlistment or induction.  There is no authority to change the HOR as officially recorded at time of entry into the military service.  However, there is authority to correct a HOR if erroneously entered on the records at that time and then only for travel and transportation purposes.  Correction of the HOR must be based on evidence that a bona fide error was made and the HOR as corrected must have been the actual home of the individual at the time of entry into the relevant period of service.  It may not be a place selected for the convenience of the soldier.

The JFTR also states that under uniform regulations prescribed by the Secretaries concerned a member who is retired with pay may, not later than one year from the date he is so retired, select his home for the purposes of travel and transportation allowances.  A member authorized to select a home for the purposes of such allowances may select as his home; (A) any place within the United States; (B) the place outside the United States from which the member was called or ordered to active duty to his first duty station; or (C) any other place.  However, if the member selects as his home a place other than a place described in clause (A) or (B) of the preceding sentence, the travel and transportation allowances authorized may not exceed the allowances which would be payable if the place selected as his home were in the United States (other than Hawaii or Alaska).

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The evidence indicates that the applicant relocated to the United States “to look for work” and not for the purpose of enlisting in the Army.  The address listed as his home at the time of his enlistment was also the address of his mother, a U.S. citizen.  As such the Board notes that while the Lavista address may have been “temporary” while he looked for work it was for all intents and purposes his “actual home” at the time of his enlistment.  

2.  The Board notes that the applicant was neither “called” nor “ordered to active duty” from his address in the Philippines.  The fact that he contends that he always intended to return to the Philippines after his military service is not a basis for establishing it as his home of record.

3.  The Board also notes, contrary to the applicant’s contention, that he is not obligated to return to Nebraska merely because that is recorded as his HOR.  Rather he is free to choose a home of selection for transportation and travel entitlements within the provisions of the statutory and regulatory guidelines.

4.  Although the applicant was allowed to have his HOR recorded as the Philippines at subsequent reenlistment points that action was contrary to the provisions of the JFTR and does not now serve as a basis on which to grant the applicant’s request.

5.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.

6.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___kak__  ___gjw__  ___ewl__  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000042889	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20001221	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Deny	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	112.01	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.