RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            8 December 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20050004638


      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. Richard T. Dunbar             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. James B. Gunlicks             |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Scott W. Faught               |     |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, in effect, that permanent change of station
(PCS) Active Duty Special Work (ADSW) Orders Number 208-007, issued by the
State of South Carolina Military Department (SCMD), Office of The Adjutant
General (OTAG), on 24 October 2002, be amended to show temporary duty
(TDY).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the duty periods of 1 October 2002
through
17 January 2003 and 4 May 2003 through 30 June 2003 at the Defense Supply
Center Columbus (DSCC), Columbus, Ohio, were less than 20 weeks each, with
a deployment to Panama from 18 January through 3 May 2003.  He claims the
duty periods at DSCC should have been TDY and not PCS.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his
application:  SCMD OTAG Orders Number 208-007; Travel Orders 301760; and
Electronic Mail (e-mail) Messages.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s record shows that while serving as a member of the
South Carolina Army National Guard (SCARNG), he was ordered to ADSW in a
PCS status for the period 1 October 2003 through 20 June 2003 (373 days).
This PCS was directed in SCMD OTAG Orders Number 208-007.

2.  Travel Orders Number 301760, dated 16 January 2003, authorized the
applicant to travel from Columbus, Ohio to a TDY location of Panama City,
Panama on 18 January 2003, for a period of 106 days, and his return to
Columbus, Ohio.

3.  In connection with the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was
obtained from the Chief, Personnel Division, National Guard Bureau (NGB).
This official states that the SCMD, OTAG issued the applicant ADSW orders
in a PCS status for a period of 373 days.  The applicant, while attached to
DSCC was sent TDY to Panama.  This official further states that
coordination with the NGB Finance Division confirms the applicant was
properly issued ADSW PCS orders based on the regulatory guidance that ADSW
tours that exceed 139 days are performed in a PCS status.  The finance
division also confirmed that the applicant’s TDY order to Panama had to
reflect lodging and meal costs if the applicant was living on the economy,
and he should have been reimbursed for this expense upon completion of his
TDY tour.  If the applicant resided in Government billets while in Panama,
the TDY orders issued were correct, and he is entitled to no further
reimbursement.
4.  The NGB Chief, Personnel Division concludes by recommending denial of
the applicant’s request that his ADSW orders be amended to show he was in a
TDY status; however, she does recommend the applicant be reimbursed for TDY
expenses if he has hotel receipts, or if the statements from two named
officials confirm he resided on the economy while he was TDY in Panama.

5.  On 10 August 2005, the applicant was provided a copy of the NGB
advisory opinion in order to have the opportunity to respond.  To date, he
has failed to reply.

6.  The applicant provides e-mail traffic between him and a lieutenant
colonel in which they discuss the period the applicant was TDY and the PCS
versus TDY status.  The LTC, while indicating support for the applicant,
did indicate that unless the applicant could provide proof that the unit
was aware he would not be in Ohio for the 373 day period before his ADSW
orders were prepared, it is unlikely the orders would be amended.

7.  Army Regulation 135-200 (Active Duty for Missions, Projects, and
Training for Reserve Component Soldier) prescribes the policies and
procedures for ordering ARNG and United States Army Reserve (USAR) Soldiers
to active duty for annual training, active duty for training, initial
active duty for training, and
ADSW.  Chapter 6 contains guidance on ADSW tours.  It states, in pertinent
part, that personnel performing ADSW tours of 1 through 139 days will be
placed in a TDY status and authorized proper rates of per diem and travel.
ADSW tours exceeding 139 days are performed in a PCS status with shipment
of household goods authorized.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant was ordered to his ADSW
tour for a period in excess of 139 days.  Therefore, his orders directed
his tour be served in a PCS status in accordance with the governing
regulation.

2.  As confirmed by the NGB advisory opinion, the applicant’s TDY Orders to
Panama would be correct if he was billeted in Government quarters, and
would require correction if he were billeted on the local economy.
However, absent any evidence confirming where he was billeted in Panama, or
that shows the amount of TDY reimbursement he received, a determination
regarding additional TDY reimbursement cannot be made by the Board.

3.  The applicant is advised to clarify any issues regarding his Panama TDY
orders and reimbursement with First Army officials, as indicated in the NGB
advisory opinion.  If after he exhausts this administrative remedy, he
still believes an error or injustice exists regarding his Panama TDY
reimbursement, he may reapply to the Board to resolve this issue.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___RTD _  __JBG __  __SWF__  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.




            ____Richard T. Dunbar _____
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004638                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/12/08                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |N/A                                     |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |N/A                                     |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |N/A                                     |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |N/A                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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