RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02941
            INDEX CODE: 128.14
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  27 Mar 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her travel and household  goods  (HHG)  entitlements  be  extended  to
31 Jul 07 to allow completion of  her  PhD  in  Mathematics  prior  to
relocating to her final destination.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She decided to leave her HHG in storage until she completed her degree
based on erroneous information  provided  by  the  F.  E.  Warren  AFB
transportation officer (TMO).  She enrolled in the fall semester at CO
State University for a PhD in Mathematics after retiring from the  Air
Force on 1 Aug 00.  Her Masters in Systems Management did not give her
sufficient background for PhD work and the complete program would take
longer than the five years she believed were  allowed  by  regulation.
The TMO advised her that the entitlement extension was granted  on  an
annual basis, was usually approved for education, and that  there  was
no limit to the number of  extensions.   She  specifically  asked  for
reiteration of the limit on  the  number  of  extensions  as  she  was
concerned about the length of time required for her program,  and  the
TMO quoted from an unknown regulation that  discussed  extensions  but
did not state a limit.  She completed her Masters  in  Mathematics  in
May 03 and expects to complete her PhD  in  May  07.   Curtailing  her
entitlements one year prior to graduation will cost  her  the  maximum
amount of storage fees plus the move to her  final  destination.   She
made her decision in good faith based  on  erroneous  information  and
should not be penalized.

The applicant provides an extract from an unidentified regulation  and
a letter from the university advising her anticipated graduation  date
is May 07.  Her complete submission, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

A member who retires from active duty with a home of  selection  (HOS)
entitlement is entitled to travel and  HHG  transportation  until  one
year after the date of termination of active duty.  A member  who,  on
the date of termination of active service, is undergoing education  or
training to qualify for acceptable civilian employment, or begins such
education or training during the one-year period following termination
of active service, is entitled to travel and HHG transportation  until
one year after the education or training is completed,  or  two  years
after the date of termination of active duty, whichever is earlier.

In accordance with paragraph U5012-1, Joint Federal Travel Regulations
(JFTR), a written time limit extension that includes an explanation of
the circumstances  justifying  the  extension  may  be  authorized  or
approved for a specific additional time period using  the  Secretarial
Process.  It may be authorized or  approved  only  when  circumstances
prevent use within the prescribed time and must be  for  the  shortest
time appropriate under the  circumstances.   It  may  not  be  granted
merely to accommodate personal preferences or  convenience.   Further,
an extension may not be authorized or approved if  it  extends  travel
and transportation allowances for more than six 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 six years from  the  separation  or  retirement  date.
Paragraph 3.6.6.1. of the Air Force Supplement to the JFTR  refers  to
Comptroller General Decision B207157, dated 2 Feb 83, which held  that
the primary requirement for travel after release from active  duty  is
that it be the result of separation or retirement from service,  since
it is not a benefit that the separated/retired  member  retains  until
used regardless of circumstances.

The applicant retired in the grade of lieutenant colonel on 1 Aug  00,
after 24 years and 1 day of active service.   Einsiedlerhof,  Germany,
was her permanent duty station (PDS).  In conjunction with her release
from active  duty,  she  made  a  shipment  of  HHG  from  Germany  to
nontemporary storage (NTS) at Guardian Services, Baltimore,  MD.   The
HHG are still in NTS pending her relocation to her HOS.

She has been enrolled at the CO State  University  in  a  PhD  program
since the 2000 Fall Semester.  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.

On 28 Jun 05, the time limit to use her entitlements was  extended  to
31 Jul 06.  She was also informed this was  the  final  extension  she
would be granted, as there was no authority to extend the  time  limit
beyond six years for members undergoing education or training.

_________________________________________________________________

JPPSO-SAT/ECAF EVALUATION:

The Joint Personal  Property  Shipping  Office,  San  Antonio  (JPPSO-
SAT/ECAF) notes the applicant  has  been  granted  extensions  through
31 Jul 06.  The intent of the program is to allow  members  undergoing
education or training to qualify for acceptable  civilian  employment.
In decision B207157, dated 2 Feb 83, the Comptroller General held that
the primary requirement for travel after release from active  duty  is
that the travel  be  the  result  of  separation  or  retirement  from
service, since it is not a benefit that the  separated/retired  member
retains until used regardless of circumstances.   Thus,  there  is  no
statutory authority to  further  extend  the  applicant’s  travel  and
transportation entitlements and the appeal should be denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant contends her target graduation of 2007 for  her  PhD  is
entirely appropriate and that she was misinformed by the F. E.  Warren
TMO about the  number  of  allowable  extensions.   She  concedes  the
regulation statement in the advisory opinion is valid but  asserts  it
does not consider the maximum expense she will bear.

A complete copy of the applicant’s response 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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice.  After a thorough review  of  the
evidence  of  record  and  the  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded her travel and HHG entitlements should be extended to 31 Jul
07.  The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however,  we  do  not
find  these  uncorroborated  assertions,   in   and   by   themselves,
sufficiently persuasive to override the provisions of statute and  the
rationale provided by JPPSO-SA/ECAF.  In decision B207157, dated 2 Feb
83, the Comptroller General held  that  the  primary  requirement  for
travel after release from active duty is that the travel be the result
of separation or retirement from service, since it is  not  a  benefit
that the separated/retired member retains  until  used  regardless  of
circumstances.   The  JFTR,  which  is  governed  by  statute,  limits
extensions to travel and transportation allowances to no more than six
years from the date of separation  or  release  from  active  duty  or
retirement, unless a certified  on-going  medical  condition  prevents
relocation.  Due to her ongoing  education,  the  applicant  has  been
granted extensions through 31 Jul 06.   Further,  on  28 Jun  05,  she
essentially was given a year’s notice before the time limit to use her
entitlements expired on 31 Jul 06.  Thus, she has not  shown  that  an
error, injustice, or statutory authority warrants extending her travel
and transportation entitlements beyond six  years.   In  view  of  the
above and absent persuasive evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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
application will only be reconsidered upon  the  submission  of  newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 7 February 2006 under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
                 Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-02941 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Aug 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, JPPSO-SAT/ECAF, dated 6 Oct 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Oct 05.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Nov 05.




                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                                   Panel Chair