ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 April 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: 20160015082 APPLICANT REQUESTS: reinstatement of his expired transportation entitlements. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Retirement orders number 046-0130 * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * Spouse retirement orders number 197-0145 * Financing addendum to purchase & sale agreement of home * Letter of tentative selection of employment for spouse * Residential real estate purchase and sale agreement specific terms * Addendum to contract – select portfolio servicing * Memo to Fort Hood, TX personal property shipping office (Also spouse letter) * Request for exception to policy for reinstate transportation shipping entitlements * Disapproval memo for exception to policy for reinstate transportation shipping entitlements FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states: a. In August 2016, he submitted a request for reinstatement of his transportation benefits. That request was denied. It appeared to him that the response given for not approving that request implied that at the level this decision was made they did not have the authority to reinstate his transportation benefit based on his circumstances. He is requesting that the Board reconsider approving his request for reinstatement of transportation benefits. In order to appeal the decision made not to reinstate his transportation benefits he is forwarding his request to the Board/approval body as per the Fort Hood, TX transportation office response memorandum of disapproval. b. He would like to have this office reconsider reinstating his transportation benefit on the grounds that the applicant and his wife served honorably over 42 years collectively in the Army. They both understand and respect policies, yet they also truly understand that there are exceptions to policy. In their previous letters requesting reinstatement they laid out the reasons for why they did not use their benefit in the prescribed time, the applicant still believes their mitigating circumstances will allow the board to reconsider reinstating their transportation benefit. At his retirement date in 2012, his wife was still on active duty and by the time she retired his benefit was expired already. So even then he would have needed to request reinstatement or extension of the benefit. He can honestly say that moving at that time was not even a thought. c. He does not know of anyone who has ever considered picking up and moving their family when their spouse is still on active duty without military orders at the point of retirement, with both college aged and school aged children around the month of October. This is another reason why he did not use his transportation benefit at the time. He is sure that the Board would agree that moving at that time was not ideal nor was there any need for a move with school just starting in August and his spouse still on active duty. He actually thinks they saved the Department of Defense money that fiscal year by not using that benefit at the time. He also believes the intent of the final move transportation policy, is to allow one last move for a military member at retirement is to assist the Soldier and his/her family in a smooth transition to civilian life. Reinstating this benefit would do just this for his family. Considering how they have been separated at times while they were both serving on active duty. d. During many field training exercises and deployments both stateside and abroad, it was only reasonable for them to try as best as possible to maintain their family in one location with the support systems needed while one military member (his spouse), was still on active duty. Transitioning to civilian life alone is difficult financially. They ended up in a situation where for about 10 months where he had not even received his VA benefit after retiring, further stressing their financial circumstances. They feel as a family that their move to relocate at this time is really their opportunity to reset as a family for the first time since their retirement. Since his wife has retired she has been serving Fort Hood Soldiers and family members as a contractor and a GS employee in the area of financial readiness/counseling in their personal lives. It is sad to see that as they try to relocate and use a benefit they earned and helped many Soldiers to better understand and use, they are unable to convince those in the decision making capacity, of their need for this very assistance in using their transportation benefit to their advantage at this transitional time in their post military lives. The applicant pleads reconsideration in re-instating his entitlement, as it will eliminate one of the most costly expenses associated with relocating a family. 3. The applicant provides: * Retirement orders 046-0130 dated, 15 February 2012 showing retirement effective date of 30 September 2012* Retirement orders 197-0145 for spouse dated, 16 July 2013 showing retirement effective date of 31 March 2014 * Financial addendum to purchase & sale agreement for home in Washington* Letter of tentative selection of employment for spouse at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA * Residential real estate purchase and sale agreement specific terms * Addendum to contract – select portfolio servicing * Initial request of reinstatement of entitlement to personal property shipping office of Fort Hood, TX for himself and spouse * * Request for exception to policy for reinstate transportation shipping entitlements* Disapproval memo for exception to policy for reinstate transportation shipping entitlements 4. A review of the applicant’s record shows: a. He enlisted into the Regular Army on 11 September 1990. b. On 15 February 2012, Headquarters, III Corps, Fort Hood, published Orders Number 046-0130 ordering his retirement effective 30 September 2012. The orders stated: * Requested place of retirement/separation: Not Applicable * You are authorized up to one year to complete selection of a home and complete travel in connection with this action* You are authorized shipment of household goods c. He retired on 30 September 2012 and he was placed on the Retired List in the rank of master sergeant/E-8 on 1 October 2012. d. The only evidence he submitted requests for extension after his retirement is dated 5 August 2016. 5. The Army G-4 reviewed his case and rendered an advisory opinion on 29 August 2018. The advisory official stated that his office reviewed the application and noted the following statutory or regulatory provisions in support of a decision: a. The Secretarial process (Army G-4) has no Joint Travel Regulation (JTR) authority to reinstate an expired travel and transportation household goods (HHG) shipment authorization that ended on 30 September 2013. The JTR is the basic statutory regulation governing a uniformed member's travel and transportation at government expense, and has the force and effect of law issued primarily under the authority of Title 37 United States Code Section 481. b. The applicant's retirement orders 046-0130, dated 15 February 2012, with a retirement date of September 30, 2012, provided additional instructions a.: "You are authorized up to one year to complete selection of home and travel in connection with this action. Shipment of household goods and travel allowances are authorized to a home of selection within the United States (including Hawaii and Alaska)." The retiree was required to request and receive annual transportation extensions from a transportation office each year prior to his retirement anniversary date. There is no JTR authority to reinstate an expired transportation authorization. 6. The applicant was provided with a copy of this advisory opinion to give him an opportunity to submit a rebuttal. He did not respond. 7. The JTR, which basic statutory regulations concerning a Uniformed Service member's travel and transportation entitlements and interpreted to have the force and effect of law, indicates that retirement transportation and travel entitlements will be used within 1 year of retirement; however, it also provides for extensions of this entitlement in 1-year increments up to five additional years, or a total of 6 years. a. Extensions due to unforeseen medical reasons, education or training, and/or other deserving cases when an unexpected event beyond the retiree's control occurs which prevents the retiree from moving within the time limits may be granted under these extension provisions. b. He retired in September 2012; his 1-year expired on 30 eptember 2013. He submitted his only extension request on 5 August 2016, missing the submission suspension by 35 months. Additional extensions of 5 years (up to a maximum of 6 years), if submitted and justified, would have expired on 30 September 2018. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board determined that relief was not warranted. Based upon the documentary evidence submitted by the applicant and found within the military service record, to include the Army G4 advisory opinion, the Board found insufficient evidence to show there was an error or an injustice which would warrant changing the applicant’s record. For that reason, the Board recommended denying the applicant’s request for relief. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING XX: XX: XX: DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Volume 1 (Uniformed Service Personnel) of the JTR contains basic statutory regulations concerning official travel and transportation of members of the uniformed services. Paragraphs U5130, U5230, and U5365-F contain the policy and procedures pertaining to the shipment of HHG to a permanent duty station (PDS) by uniformed service personnel upon retirement. In effect, these paragraphs authorize a member travel and transportation allowances to a PDS selected by the member from his last PDS upon retirement. They state that a member on active duty is entitled to travel and transportation allowances to a home selected by the member from the last PDS upon retirement. They also establish time limitations for shipment of HHG and state that travel must be completed within 1 year from the active service termination date. 3. Extension provisions to the 1-year time limit are also provided for deserving cases under the Secretarial process. This process allows for extensions based on an unexpected event beyond the member's control that prevents movement to a PDS within the specified time limit. An extension of the time limit may be authorized by the Secretarial process if it is in the best interest of the service or substantially to the benefit of the member and not costly or otherwise adverse to the service. These extensions are approved for the specific period of time that the member anticipates is needed to complete the move, and if additional time is required, the member may request a further extension. Paragraph U5012-I of volume 1 of the JTR provides the policy on restrictions to time limit extensions and states that a written time limit extension that includes an explanation of the circumstances justifying the extension may be approved for a specific additional time using the Secretarial process. However, extensions under this process will not be authorized if it extends travel and transportation allowances for more than 6 years from the separation/retirement date. These JTR provisions and time limitations for the shipment of HHG were also in effect at the time of the applicant's retirement. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) 20160015082