PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           19 March 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001065380

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr.		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 his debt be cancelled and he be refunded the monies already collected from him.

3.  The applicant states that he tried for seven years to get the problem caused by the miscalculation of his pay entry basic date (PEBD) and basic active service date resolved.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that after having had prior service, he reenlisted in the Regular Army on 22 June 1994.  A Statement of Service For Computation of Length of Service for Pay Purposes, DA Form 1506, was prepared on four occasions and each form calculated a different PEBD on the applicant.

5.  Around March 1997, the applicant was notified he was in debt to the government as a result of his PEBD miscalculation.  He submitted a request for remission and/or cancellation of indebtedness to Fort McPherson, GA.  The debt may have been suspended at this time but apparently the packet was lost or otherwise not acted upon.

6.  Another debt was created based upon the incorrect dates on the DA Form 1506.  The debt was suspended for a time and then reinstated.  In December 2000, the applicant’s chain of command requested it be suspended again while the applicant initiated another request for remission/cancellation of the debt.  On 3 March 2001, the applicant completed and his commander signed an Application for Remission or Cancellation of Indebtedness, DA Form 3508-R.  At that time he owed two debts totaling $4,496.80 due to overpayment of his pay and allowances when his PEBD was calculated incorrectly, $1,198.88 of which had been collected.

7.  Records at the Defense Finance and Accounting Service – Indianapolis Center (DFAS-IN) indicate that although a debt for $2,466.61 was established on 1 April 1997 and a debt for $2,030.19 (for a total debt of $4,496.80) was established on 16 April 1998, no collections were made on this debt until about July 2000.

8.  On 3 August 2001, the Special Actions Branch, U. S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) approved remission or cancellation of the applicant’s indebtedness in the amount of $3,297.92.  The $1,198.88 that had been collected prior to the commander’s signature on the application could not be considered by PERSCOM for remission or cancellation.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  On four different occasions, appropriate military officials calculated the applicant’s PEBD and came up with four different PEBDs.  This resulted in  DFAS establishing two debts on the applicant based upon these errors in the calculation of his PEBD – a debt for $2,466.61 was established on 1 April 1997 and a debt for $2,030.19 (for a total debt of $4,496.80) was established on        16 April 1998.  No collections were made on this debt until about July 2000.

2.  PERSCOM approved remission or cancellation of the applicant’s indebtedness for $3,297.92 of that debt but was prohibited from considering the remaining $1,198.88 that had been collected prior to the commander’s signature on his application for remission or cancellation.

3.  The evidence shows that the applicant took immediate action to satisfy the requirement for submitting an application for remission or cancellation of his indebtedness when his indebtedness first became known in 1997 (prior to the establishment of his second debt).  The packet was lost for an unknown reason although it appears collection of the debt had been suspended since it was not until 2000 that efforts were again initiated to collect the debt.  At that time, the applicant again took steps to resolve the issue.

4.  While the Board recognizes that the Army is not liable for the erroneous actions of its officers, agents, or employees, even though committed in the performance of their duties, the Board believes that it would be in the interest of justice and equity to grant the full relief requested.

5.  The Board believes that had the PERSCOM acted upon the applicant’s request for remission or cancellation of this indebtedness prior to any collections being made by DFAS, PERSCOM would have remitted or cancelled the entire debt.

6.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

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

     a.  showing the applicant completed and his commander signed a DA Form 3508-R on 1 June 1998 requesting remission or cancellation of his indebtedness for a total amount of $4,496.80; and

     b.  showing that the DA From 3508-R was received and processed by the appropriate office at PERSCOM and approved for remission or cancellation of the total amount of $4,496.80 prior to any collection being made by DFAS.

2.  That, as a result of the above corrections, any collections made by DFAS for this indebtedness be refunded to the applicant as an erroneous collection.

BOARD VOTE:  

__slp___  __sk____  __eja___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Shirley L. Powell
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001065380	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020319	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	128.10	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.