| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Member | |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be paid for the 70 days of leave he lost at the time of retirement.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was authorized to take terminal leave in conjunction with his retirement; however, the commanding general deemed his position as mission essential due to Operation Desert Storm and he was denied the opportunity to take the leave or to be paid for it.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted on 12 January 1972 and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments. His records also show that he cashed in 60 days of accrued leave on 3 September 1979, when he reenlisted. He was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 12 December 1982.
On 16 July 1991, orders were published by the Personnel Service Center (PSC) in Wurzburg, Germany, reassigning him to the Army Transition Point at Fort McPherson, Georgia, effective 1 December 1991. The orders authorized him 60 days of transition leave and authorized him to retire by reason of length of service on 31 January 1992.
Meanwhile, on 22 August 1991, the applicant submitted a request for overseas separation in Germany. His request was approved and his orders reassigning him to Fort McPherson were revoked on 1 October 1991.
On 4 December 1991, orders were again published by the PSC reassigning him to the United States Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Retired) effective 31 January 1992. His orders also authorized 60 days of transition leave.
On 31 January 1992, the applicant was honorably released from active duty in Wurzburg, Germany, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 12, for retirement based on length of service. He had served 20 years and 19 days of total active service and was placed on the Retired List effective 1 February 1992.
Army Regulation 630-5 serves as the authority for leaves and passes. It states, in pertinent part, that Congress has provided compensation (no more than 60 days in a military career) for soldiers who were not able to use their leave because military requirements prevented it. Soldiers will not be required to use leave immediately prior to separation simply for the purpose of reducing leave balances. On the other hand, use of leave as an extra money program defeats the intent of Congress to provide for the health and welfare of soldiers. It should not be used either as a method of compensation or as a career continuation incentive. It is specifically intended that large leave balances will not be accrued expressly for settlement upon release from active duty. Additionally, leave will not be granted that will interfere with timely processing or transition.
Department of Defense (DOD) Financial Management Regulation (Also known as the DOD Pay Manual) provides, in pertinent part, that beginning on 10 February 1976, a military member may not be paid for more than 60 days of accrued leave during a career. An exception to that provision was approved effective 2 August 1990, which allowed Reserve and Retired Component members who were called to active duty during the Persian Gulf Conflict to be paid for accrued leave over the 60-day limit.
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 not authorized to be paid for his accrued leave at the time of his separation because he had previously cashed in his maximum entitlement of 60 days.
2. While it is unfortunate that the applicant may have lost some of his accrued leave at the time of his separation, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record that he was unjustly denied the opportunity to take ordinary or terminal leave at some time prior to his scheduled separation date, or that he attempted to change the date of his retirement in order to avoid the loss of his leave.
3. Although it is not the intent of the Government that soldiers lose their accrued leave, soldiers are routinely denied transition leave due to mission essential needs. There are no guarantees that transition leave will always be approved or that circumstances will change that prevent one from taking transition leave, which is an inherent risk in accumulating large sums of leave for such purposes.
4. The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board; however, they are not supported by the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record. He has provided no evidence to show how much leave he lost or the circumstances surrounding its loss. Based on the evidence of record, he retired as originally scheduled.
5. Notwithstanding the foregoing conclusions, there are no provisions in the applicable law that allow for payment to the applicant for leave lost.
6. 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
___kak __ __ao____ ___rjw __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002070671 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/07/02 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 255 | 121.0300/RESTORE LEAVE |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017593
Congress has provided compensation (no more than 60 days in a military career) for Soldiers who were not able to use their leave because military requirements prevented it. While it is not readily apparent, based on the available evidence, where the applicant lost the 11.5 days of leave she claims, the information obtained from DFAS indicates that she was paid for 15.5 days of leave that she was not authorized to be paid. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to dispute the information...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078726C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. It states, in pertinent part, that Congress has provided compensation (no more than 60 days in a military career) for soldiers who were not able to use their leave because military requirements prevented it. While it is unfortunate that the applicant may have lost some of his accrued leave at the time of his separation, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081435C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Congress has provided compensation (no more than 60 days in a military career) for soldiers who were not able to use their leave because military requirements prevented it. While it is unfortunate that the applicant lost some of his accrued leave, as do many soldiers every year, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021275
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that he be paid for 114.5 days of accrued leave he lost at the time of retirement. The applicant was not authorized to be paid for his accrued leave at the time of his separation because he was not authorized to be paid for more than 60 days of leave in a career and he had already cashed in 60 days of leave during prior separations (although it appears he may have had additional special leave paid for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9511372C070209
He further states that his retirement date was changed to 1 March 1996, that the court-martial charges were subsequently dropped, and that the flag was lifted on 16 October 1995. On 1 October 1995 the applicant lost 23.5 days of accrued leave. RECOMMENDATION: That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by paying the individual concerned for the 23.5 days of leave he lost on 1 October 1995.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005658
The applicant's October 2006 LES shows that he had a balance of 49.5 days of accrued leave, lost 19 days, and 17 use/lose leave. On 5 February 2007, the G1 replied to the applicant's question, "Can a Soldier without any SLA and with a leave balance of 87 days retire on 30 September and cash in 31 days of leave on 30 September and go into transition leave for the remainder of October and November"? The applicant reported for his final outprocessing on 29 September 2006, one day prior to the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015482
He was charged regular leave while on convalescent leave in addition to being billed for treatment for an infection that occurred while on active duty. The applicant provides: a. Evidence that shows an orthopedic surgeon at MacDill Air Force Base, FL, recommended convalescent leave from 16 February to 11 March and 11 March to 11 April 2012. c. A Leave and Earnings Statement for 25 April 2012 that shows he began the period with a leave balance of 84 days, he was charged 84 days leave, and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075556C070403
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: While it is unfortunate that the applicant may have lost some of his accrued leave at the time of his separation, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record that he was unjustly denied the opportunity to take ordinary or terminal leave at some time prior to his separation date. The Board is not an investigative agency and while it reviews many cases in which soldiers make...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510219C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That he be reimbursed for 52 days of accrued leave that he lost at the time he was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL). PURPOSE: To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. That regulation also states that Congress has provided compensation (no more than 60 days in a military career) for soldiers who were not able...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9609362C070209
He states he outprocessed on 4 December 1991 and departed on 55 days of transition leave and that he was paid in December and January. His DD Form 214 indicates his separation date as 4 December 1991, that he did not contribute to the VEAP and that he was paid for 60 days of accrued leave. As such he is entitled to have the Drivers Badge reflected on his separation document and item 15a (VEAP contribution) and item 16 (days accrued leave paid) should be corrected.