RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         01 MARCH 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040001370


      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. Kenneth H. Aucock             |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Walter Morrison               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Robert Duecaster              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Antonio Uribe                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reimbursement for 19 days of accrued leave that
he had to forfeit.

2.  The applicant states that due to a medical emergency at the end of his
military career he was forced to forfeit 19 days of accrued earned leave.
Prior to suffering a detached retina on 5-6 May 2003, he had made plans and
taken action to obtain an approved transitional leave, only to have his
plans thwarted by a medical emergency.  He tried to get extended to allow
sufficient time to use his leave; unfortunately, his request was not timely
acted upon.  It is unfair that he should lose 19 days of leave he earned
because of an unexpected medical emergency.

3.  The applicant provides the documents depicted herein.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Duty) shows that he retired from the Army on 31 May 2003 in the
grade of lieutenant colonel with 28 years and 13 days of active service.
The copy of the LES (leave and earning statement) for the period 1-31 May
2003 that he submits with his request shows that he had a balance of 82
days of leave.

2.  On 29 April 2003 the applicant requested transitional leave from 10 May
2003 to 31 May 2003.

3.  On 15 May 2003 a doctor from the “Retina Consultants of Southern
Colorado, P.C.” stated that the applicant was seen on 5 May 2003 on an
emergency basis at the request of his ophthalmologist at the Air Force
Academy, and was found to have a retinal detachment in his left eye, which
required emergency surgery on   6 May 2003.  He was admitted to Evans Army
Community Hospital postoperatively, and restricted from reading, driving,
working, or any strenuous activity.  Examination on 15 May 2003 revealed
total reattachment of the retina with a return of good vision in the eye.

4.  On 16 May 2003 the applicant requested that his retirement, scheduled
for      1 June 2003, be extended for one month because of his medical
emergency.  He stated that he had been unable to complete his clearing
processing and unable to begin the 22 days of terminal leave (over and
above the 60 days that he was cashing in).  He stated that his 10 duty days
of authorized clearing time was unexpectedly interrupted after only 3 days
(30 April-2 May 2003), because of his eye problem.  After his examination
on 5 May and subsequent operation on        6 May 2003, he was ordered to
remain home for the next 10 days.  He was unable to resume his clearing
until 16 May 2003, and in order to have sufficient time to clear, he would
not be able to begin his terminal leave until 29 May 2003, requiring him to
forfeit 19 days of accrued leave.  Had it not been for his medical
emergency, he would have completed his clearing and started his terminal
leave as originally planned.

5.  The applicant’s command recommended approval of his request, which was
forwarded to the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) on 16 May 2003.

6.  On 16 June 2003, subsequent to the applicant’s retirement, PERSCOM
replied, stating that his request was returned without action by direction
of the Office of The Surgeon General in that there was insufficient time to
process his request.

7.  On 16 September 2003 the applicant applied to the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service (DFAS) for relief.  On 16 October 2003 that agency
responded, stating that his request for payment of 19 days of additional
leave could not be approved, as the maximum allowed was 60 days.  He was
advised to apply to this Board for relief.

8.  In response to a request from a member of this agency, the applicant
forwarded a copy of his LES for 1-31 May 2003 and medical documents
reflecting his surgery for his eye condition.

9.  In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from
the Compensation and Entitlements Division, Office of the Deputy Chief of
Staff, G-1. That agency recommended approval of the applicant’s request
that he be reimbursed for 19 days of leave that he was unable to take.  The
applicant concurred with the advisory opinion.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-10 provides the leave policy for Soldiers and
states that by law, payment of accrued leave is limited to 60 days one time
during a military career, unless earned in a missing status, earned by a
Reserve Component, retired Reserve, or retired member of the Regular Army
while serving on active duty in support of a contingency operation, or
earned by Soldiers who die because of an injury or illness incurred while
serving on active duty in support of a contingency operation.


11.  That regulation also states that accrued leave that exceeds 60 days at
the end of the fiscal year will be lost except for special leave accrual to
provide relief to Soldiers who are not allowed leave when undergoing
lengthy deployment or during periods of hostility.  Special leave accrual
authorizes Soldiers to carry forward up to 90 days of leave at the end of a
fiscal year.  Leave accrual in excess of 60 days is credited only for use,
not for payment.

12.  Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation 7000.14-R states
in pertinent part that a military member is entitled to receive payment for
no more than 60 days of accrued leave during a military career.

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-101 prescribes the policy, standards, and
requirements for personnel in and out processing, and states in pertinent
part that Soldiers will be given a minimum of 3 working days to out-process
unless it is locally determined that Soldiers can out-process quicker.  It
also states that Soldiers assigned to remote locations may be out-processed
by their unit commanders, executive officers, or other designated
officials.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence shows that the applicant did plan to use 22 days of
accrued leave between 10 May 2003 and 31 May 2003, but that his intention
was thwarted because of his medical emergency.

2.  Nonetheless, the applicant, although apparently on convalescent leave
for   10 days from 6 May 2003 to 15 May 2003, although not considered
authorized accrued leave as such, was on leave to the extent that he
performed no military duties during that period of time.  Moreover,
subsequent to his convalescent leave the applicant had sufficient remaining
time to use a good part of the          22 days leave that he had accrued,
notwithstanding his premise that he had to use this time to continue his
out-processing.

3.  Nevertheless, the law does not allow payment for more than 60 days
unless under the circumstances indicated herein.  Of note is the fact that
those Soldiers who are authorized special leave accrual cannot be paid for
leave in excess of   60 days.  Consequently, to grant the applicant’s
request would give him an advantage by providing him compensation not
afforded other Soldiers.

4.  Therefore, and in spite of the advisory opinion in this matter, the
applicant’s request for reimbursement for 19 days of accrued leave that he
had to forfeit is denied.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___WM  _  __RD ___  ___AU __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.




                                  _____Walter Morrison_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040001370                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050301                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |121.03                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]