Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01917
Original file (BC-2005-01917.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01917
            INDEX CODE:  128.05
      xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  COUNSEL:  NONE

      xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx      HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  26 OCT 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to  entitle  him  to  household  goods  (HHG)
transportation to his home of selection (HOS).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He had a brain tumor with  memory  loss  and  was  unable  to  conduct
business and had difficulty remembering to perform tasks.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement,  a
copy of a Neurology  Outpatient  Progress  Note,  Veterans  Industries
Vocational Rehabilitation Program Letter, AF Form 781,  Multiple  Item
Prescription, Special  Orders  Number  AC-002820  and  a  copy  of  an
Extension of travel and Transportation Entitlements Letter.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant retired from the Regular Air Force on 1  July  1997,  in
the grade of master sergeant.  The applicant  entered  college  during
the  one  year  period  following  termination  of  active  duty.   He
requested and received an extension of his transportation entitlements
from 30 June 1998 to 30 June 1999.

On 21 April 2003, the applicant was referred to a clinic by his social
worker for an assessment, because he was failing the college  program.
Upon admission to the Incentive Work  Therapy  (IWT)  program  he  was
diagnosed with depression, post traumatic stress disorder,  bipolar  I
disorder and a benign brain tumor.

On 3 October 2003, the applicant dropped out of the education  program
due to his frustration over his inability to retain information and to
pursue a day treatment social therapy program.

His spouse states he had a very rare brain tumor and  doctors  watched
it for 3 years before deciding to remove it in July 2004.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

JPPSO-SAT/ECAF states in view of the  6-year  statute  of  limitations
regarding travel after release from  active  duty,  JPPSO  is  without
authority to recommend approval in this case.    A  member  on  active
duty is authorized HHG transportation from the last  or  any  previous
duty station, from a designated place in CONUS, from storage,  or  any
combination thereof, to the member’s home of  selection.   Except  for
members undergoing hospitalization, medical  treatment,  education  or
training, or in other deserving cases, the HHG must be turned over for
transportation within one year following termination of active duty.

Under the provision of paragraph U5012-I, JFTR, the 1-year time  limit
may be extended using the Secretarial Process.  However, and extension
may not be authorized/approved if it extends travel and  transpiration
allowances for more than 6  years  from  the  date  of  separation  or
release from active duty or retirement  unless  a  certified  on-going
medical condition prevents relocation of the member for longer than  6
years from the separation/retirement date.

Regarding extension of the travel time limit, the Comptroller  General
of the United States has ruled that Congress intended travel to be the
result of separation from active duty.  Decision B207157,  2  February
1983, states, “The primary requirement  is  that  the  travel  be  the
result of separation/retirement from the service, since it  is  not  a
benefit  which  the  separated/retired  member  retains   until   used
regardless of circumstances.”

In this case the applicant was released from active  duty  on  30 June
1997.  He received an education extension that extended his travel and
transportation entitlements to 30 June 1999.  His  medical  conditions
did not arise until  September  2001,  more  than  2 years  after  his
entitlements had expired.

The JPPSO-SAT/ECAF evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states his condition started before  2001,  but  he  was
unaware of it.  He was experiencing memory loss  and  struggling  with
classes in school, but did not realize what  was  going  on  until  he
actually had the first seizure in 2001, which is when  the  tumor  was
found.  His surgeon stated that the tumor had  been  growing  for  ten
years or more.  He and his wife requested another  extension  and  the
application was supposed to have been sent to them, however they never
received  the  application.   During  this  time  the  applicant   was
experiencing difficulty completing tasks and was forced to drop out of
school due to his memory loss and mood swings.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law
or regulations.

2.    The application was not timely filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate  the
existence of an error or  injustice.   After  carefully  reviewing  the
evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, it  is  our
opinion the applicant should be  entitled  to  transportation  benefits
authorized for members retiring  from  the  Air  Force.   Documentation
provided by the Commander of Neurosurgery, Wilford Hall Medical Center,
indicates that it is extremely likely that the  applicant’s  tumor  was
present for at least ten years prior to its removal in July 2004. Thus,
it is almost certain it started during the time  in  which  he  was  on
active duty. In view of the above and in order to resolve any potential
injustices to the applicant, we believe his records should be corrected
to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

      The pertinent military records of  the  Department  of  the  Air
Force relating to APPLICANT,  be  corrected  to  show  that  competent
authority determined a certified on-going  medical  condition  existed
that prevented relocation; and, in accordance with the  provisions  of
paragraph U5012-I, Joint Federal Travel Regulations,  his  travel  and
transportation allowances were extended to 31 December 2005.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket  Number  BC-2005-
01917 in Executive Session on 7 July 2005, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Richard A. Peterson III, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Sue A. Lumpkin Member
                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Jun 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Letter, JPPSO-SAT/ECAF, dated 22 Jun 05.
      Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jun 05.
      Exhibit C. Letter, Applicant, dated 29 Jun 05, w/atch.




      RICHARD A. PETERSON
      Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2005-01917




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of  the  Department  of  the  Air
Force relating to  APPLICANT  be  corrected  to  show  that  competent
authority determined a certified on-going  medical  condition  existed
that prevented relocation; and, in accordance with the  provisions  of
paragraph U5012-I, Joint Federal Travel Regulations,  his  travel  and
transportation allowances were extended to 31 December 2005.







  JOE G. LINEBERGER

  Director

  Air Force Review Boards Agency



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02941

    Original file (BC-2005-02941.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Prior to expiration of her travel and transportation entitlements on 31 Jul 01, she requested an extension of the time limit for educational reasons. Since 31 Jul 01, the applicant’s travel and transportation entitlements have been extended in one-year increments as a member undergoing education or training, and she has been informed the approval did not extend her NTS entitlement beyond 31 Jul 01. She was also informed this was the final extension she would be granted, as there was no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03447

    Original file (BC-2006-03447.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She completed 20 years and 19 days of active service for retirement. Under the provisions of paragraph U5012-I, JFTR, a written time limit extension that includes an explanation of the circumstances justifying the extension may be authorized/approved for a specific additional time period using the Secretarial Process only when circumstances prevented use within the prescribed time; must be for the shortest time appropriate under the circumstances; not be granted merely to accommodate...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02486

    Original file (BC-2005-02486.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    An extension of the time limit would apply only for the amount of time the member was confined in a medical facility or deemed to be unable to travel due to medical reasons that occurred during the first year. An extension of the time limit would apply only for the amount of time the member was confined in a medical facility or deemed to be unable to travel due to medical reasons that occurred during the first year. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03655

    Original file (BC-2005-03655.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ECAF states the applicant retired from active duty on 31 January 1992, and the reason he did not relocate within the one year following termination of active duty was not due to an unexpected event beyond his control, but due to his decision to obtain employment in the local area of his last duty station. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 16 Dec...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02012

    Original file (BC-2004-02012.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Per JFTR paragraph U5012-I, a written time extension that includes an explanation of circumstances justifying the extension may: 1) be authorized/approved for a specific additional time period using the Secretarial Process; 2) be authorized or approved only when circumstances prevent use within the prescribed time, and must be for the shortest time appropriate under the circumstances; 3) not be granted merely to accommodate personal preferences or conveniences (DoD/CG #99-1); and 4) not be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02157

    Original file (BC-2005-02157.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. JPPSO-SAT/ECAF states that members who retire from service with a home of selection (HOS) authorization are entitled to non-temporary storage from the date the retired orders are issued until 1 year from the date of termination of active duty. Under the provisions of paragraph U5365(D),...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03808

    Original file (BC-2005-03808.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was counseled that he is entitled to one year of storage following his retirement from the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00637

    Original file (BC-2006-00637.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00637 INDEX CODE: 128.00 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to repay all charges associated with the nontemporary storage (NTS) and have his shipping entitlements reinstated so he can reship his household goods (HHG) at government expense. Therefore, we agree with the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00633

    Original file (BC-2006-00633.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02814

    Original file (BC-2005-02814.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The entitlement begins on the date the orders are issued and terminates one year from the date of termination of active duty. However, evidence shows the applicant agreed to have his HHG shipped to Lancaster, CA, upon his separation from active duty and subsequently requested an extension of storage until 23 December 2005. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that...