PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 17 April 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002081806


         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson
Mr. Harry B. Oberg		Member
Mr. Ronald J. Weaver		Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS :

1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

---

2. The applicant requests, in effect, remission or cancellation of his debt to the Army.

3. The applicant states, in effect, that he was separated from the Army due to unsatisfactory performance based on his failure of the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). As a result of his discharge, he was unable to reenlist for the time necessary to qualify for the household goods weight allowance necessary to support his shipment. He claims that he submitted an Application for Remission or Cancellation of Indebtedness (DA Form 3508-R) prior to his separation, but its processing was not completed until after he was separated. He further states that he is currently a member of the Arkansas Army National Guard and has passed the APFT. In support of his application, he provides the DA Form 3508-R he submitted prior to his separation from active duty.

4. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years on 3 November 2000, and was assigned to Fort Rucker, Alabama, with a reporting date of 13 November 2000.

5. On 6 November 2000, an application for the shipment and/or shipment of household goods (DA Form 1299) pertaining to the applicant was prepared at the Fort Sill, Oklahoma, transportation office. The applicant was not available to sign this application.

6. The applicant’s August 2002 leave and earnings statement (LES) shows that he incurred a debt to the Army in the amount of $3,153.99 due to having shipped 7,768 pounds in excess of the administrative weight allowance for household goods authorized by the Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR). The supporting documentation shows that the applicant was authorized to ship 8,000 pounds and that the actual weight of his shipment was 15,768 pounds.

7. On 4 September 2002, the applicant submitted a memorandum to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), Indianapolis, Indiana, requesting remission or cancellation of his indebtedness. In his request, he stated at the time of his enlistment, his recruiter stated he would arrange for the shipment of the applicant’s household goods. The recruiter failed to do this, and he arranged for the shipment himself with Fort Sill transportation office. The earliest pick-up date that could be arranged was for after he was due at Fort Rucker, and the recruiter agreed to ensure that goods were shipped. He stated that he gave his recruiter specific instructions to ship only his furniture and clothing, and to leave all the other property in the storage facility it was in because he had already arranged payment for the continued storage. He stated that it was not until his property reached Fort Rucker that he discovered the recruiter had shipped all of the property from his storage containers without his knowledge or approval.
8. In his memorandum to DFAS, the applicant further indicated that he was never made aware or briefed on the shipping limitations and was never provided any documentation or briefings on the subject. He further stated that he never signed any of the documents that authorized the shipment of his household goods. He also stated that he was never even made aware that the Army was seeking restitution for the excess weight shipment until he was informed by his unit commander on 24 August 2002. He concluded his statement by indicating that any garnishment of his wages would cause him an extreme financial hardship.

9. On 5 September 2002, the applicant submitted his DA Form 3508-R requesting cancellation or remission of his debt to the Army of $3,153.99, and his unit commander verified the document as required.

10. On 18 September 2002, the applicant’s unit commander prepared a memorandum supporting the applicant’s request for cancellation or remission of his indebtedness. In it, the unit commander stated that the applicant was experiencing financial difficulties and would likely suffer extreme financial difficulties in the near future. The reason cited was that the applicant was married and had three children under the age of ten, and was in the process of being separated from the Army, which would require him to move his family and to be temporarily unemployed. The unit commander also indicated that the information presented to him showed that the applicant was never notified of the weight limitations and never signed any documentation from a transportation office pertaining to the shipment of his household goods. All these transactions occurred over the phone and were coordinated by the applicant’s recruiter. The unit commander stated the opinion that the debt could have been avoided had the applicant been available for his initial transportation appointment and present when his household goods were shipped. He concluded that the applicant acted in good faith and unknowingly moved the excess goods, with no intent to cheat the government. In addition, he was never made aware of the debt until
24 August 2002, nearly two years after the fact.

11. On 24 September 2002, the applicant’s garrison commander recommended approval of his request for remission or cancellation of indebtedness. On
25 September 2002, the applicant was released from active duty. On 30 October 2002, the Chief Special Actions, U.S. Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM), responded to the applicant’s request by indicating that the governing regulation did not allow the remission or cancellation of a debt after a member separated from the Army unless the soldier reenlisted. The applicant was advised to apply to this Board if he believed an error or injustice had occurred.

---

12. Army Regulation 600-4 provides instructions for submitting and processing applications for remission or cancellation of indebtedness to the United States Army. Applications must be based on injustice, hardship, or both. This includes debts caused by errors in pay to or on behalf of a soldier. Chapter 3 provides the administrative procedures for submitting an application for remission/cancellation of indebtedness.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that the debt was incurred through no fault of his own, that he had never been briefed on household goods weight restrictions, and that he never signed any of the transportation documents that authorized the shipment; and it finds this claim has merit.

2. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was never informed of the debt until two years after the fact, and that once he was notified that he was indebted to the government in the amount of $3,153.99, due to an excess household goods shipment, he immediately attempted to resolve the pay issue and began the process of preparing and submitting an application for remission or cancellation of indebtedness.

3. An 18 September 2002 memorandum prepared by the applicant’s unit commander confirms that the applicant was not notified of the debt until nearly two years after the fact. The unit commander further exonerated the applicant of any fault for the debt and verified the hardship the applicant would face if he were required to pay the debt. This formalized the command position in support of the remission or cancellation of the applicant’s indebtedness, which was later supported by the garrison commander. However, because of the late notification of the debt and the fact the applicant was processing for separation, the DA Form 3508-R was not received at PERSCOM until after the applicant had been released from active duty. Therefore, the application could not be processed.

4. In view of the facts of this case, the Board finds sufficient evidence to show that the late notification of the debt incurred by the applicant resulted in there being insufficient time to process his request for remission or cancellation of the debt prior to his separation, and resulted in an undue financial hardship being placed upon him and his family. Therefore, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate to grant the requested relief at this time.

5. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

---

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the application for remission/cancellation of indebtedness of $3,1532.99, due to excess weight of household goods shipment, submitted by the individual concerned was approved for the full amount of the debt on
24 September 2002; and by reimbursing him any portion of the total debt that may have already been collected.

BOARD VOTE:

___hbo__ __rjw ___ ___wtm _ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  ____Walter T. Morrison____
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002081806
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	2003/04/17
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	N/A
DATE OF DISCHARGE	2002/09/25
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	N/A
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 293	128.1000
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.