# 2020-080 Pay and Benefits, Integrated Relocation Program, Intended Place of Residence

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2021–03–30

The grievor argued that he should have been granted an additional extension to his Intended Place of Residence (IPR) benefits due to catastrophic damage that occurred to his principal residence and the extended delays in receiving information from the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF).

The Director General Compensation and Benefits, as the Initial Authority (IA), determined that three Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program (CFIRP) Directives were in effect since the date of the grievor's release. The IA determined that the CFIRP Directive 2009-2014 applied to the grievor, as it was in effect on the grievor's release date. Based on article 14.1.02 of the CFIRP Directive 2009-2014, the Director Compensation and Benefits Administration (DCBA) could exercise Ministerial authority to extend the two-year limitation for an IPR move for an additional year. This occurred in the grievor's case but the grievor was unable to complete the necessary repairs and sell his principal residence prior to the extension. The IA found that there was no authority to reimburse the grievor's expenses beyond the DCBA extension and did not afford redress. 

The Committee found that the CFIRP Directive 2009-2014 applied to the grievor's IPR benefits and any associated requests for an extension to his relocation benefits.  

The Committee then subsequently found that the grievor had no entitlement to reimbursement for expenses for the move to his IPR beyond the DCBA granted one-year extension. The Committee found that as the grievor was not eligible for a second extension, there was no need to consider if one should be granted in the grievor's circumstances. 

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority (FA) not afford redress.  

FA Decision Summary

The Acting Chief of the Defence Staff, acting as the FA, agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation.