MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            30 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999031479

	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. Walter Avery, Jr.		                         Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Chairperson	
	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. lErnest W. Lutz, Jr.		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:  Exception to the time limitation on the shipping of property at government expense.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his wife’s medical and legal problems and financial hardship warrants an exception to the 6-year limitation on the movement of property.  He says his wife sustained injuries in January 1996 and again in February 1996.  These injuries prevented travel because of her need to have medical treatment. 

In support of his request, he has included a separate statement, a letter sent from the applicant’s spouse to the U.S. Department of Labor, a letter prepared by the applicant’s wife’s doctor that gives a summary of her care, a copy of a letter prepared by an attorney that indicates the applicant’s wife had filed complaints against the Defense Commissary Agency, a news clipping that describes how the applicant’s wife won her complaint against the Defense Commissary Agency, and a copy of the applicant’s discharge orders indicating his discharge on         30 September 1992.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were not available.  Information herein was derived from documents he has provided.

The discharge orders indicate the applicant was discharged on 29 September 1992.  The same orders read “You are authorized to ship your household goods to your home of selection and completion of travel within one year unless specific approval otherwise was authorized.”

In the self-authored statement that applicant states he remained in the local area due to his wife’s employment.  He describes a series of unfortunate events that befell his wife and their family following her injury in January 1996, to include two automobile accidents, extensive medical treatment, legal battles, and the filling of bankruptcy.

Joint Federal Travel Regulation, paragraph U5130 provides, in pertinent part, a member may select a home any place in the Unites States.  Travel must be completed within one year after active duty termination.  The Secretarial Process may approve an extension of the one year time limit when an unexpected event beyond the member’s control prevents the member from moving to the home with the specified time limit.

The 36 Comptroller General 781 established the precedent that 5 years is the maximum reasonable time period to entitle military personnel for payment of travel, after the initial year.

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 applicant was entitled to move his household goods at government expense during the period 30 September 1992 until 30 September 1993.  The applicant did not request an extension, therefore this entitlement expired on        1 October 1993.  The events described in his supporting statement did not begin until 30 June 1996, several years after the entitlement had expired.

2.  If the applicant had requested a second extension and if that extension had been approved for the maximum 5 year period, the entitlement would have expired on 1 October 1998.  The applicant did not request movement until         30 August 1999.  In essence the applicant is requesting a third extension.  The applicant did not explain why a request for a first or second extension was not submitted in a timely manner.  The medical and legal events described do not indicate that the wife could not have traveled during the period 30 September 1992 – 1 October 1998.  After considering the regulatory limitations and the question of justice and fairness, the applicant has not submitted sufficient evidence to warrant an extension beyond the maximum six-year period of entitlement.

3.  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

__bje ___  __hof____  __ewl___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999031479	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000330	
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         1.142.00		
2. 		
3.   		
4.		
5.		
6.