RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01334
	
	  	COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be compensated for her Personally Procured Move (PPM) as 
briefed to her by Hickam Transportation Management Office (TMO). 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The TMO office incorrectly used “low cost” rates to counsel her 
on her PPM application rather than the newly implemented “Best 
Value” rates.  As such, the counselor incorrectly estimated the 
amount of compensation she would receive for a “Do-it-Yourself” 
(DITY) move.  She would not have done a DITY move had she known 
the correct rate provided no incentive and resulted in extra 
costs.

In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a letter from 
the Commander, and other forms associated with her move.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is in the Regular Air Force serving in the grade 
of master sergeant.

On 29 April 2010, pursuant to Permanent Change of Station 
orders, from Hickam AFB, HI to Eglin AFB FL, the applicant was 
counseled on PPMs.  The applicant was quoted $17,119.19 as the 
“Estimated Gross Incentive” to personally procure her move.  
Based on that amount, the applicant was given an advance payment 
of $10,812.12.  

On 6 August 2010, the Eglin TMO computed the applicant’s actual 
cost as 9,098.01.  Since the applicant received an advance, she 
owed the government, $2,021.77.  The applicant applied for a 
remittance of debt, which the Air Force approved. 




Effective 1 April 2010, change 283 to the JFTR requires that 
Government Constructed Costs (GCC) used to determine the 
incentive payments in PPM be based on “best value” versus the 
“low cost” charges.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

PPA HQ/ECAF recommends denial.  ECAF states the JFTR requires 
the member’s incentive be based on 95 percent of the GCC, and at 
the time of the applicant’s shipment, the GCC was based on “best 
value” rates.  The applicant’s total moving expenses totaled 
$8,228.59.  Although, she did not receive as much incentive as 
she was initially advised, she did not lose any money on the 
PPM.  The applicant applied for and was approved for a remission 
of the debt established for the excess advance payment she 
received in the amount of $2,021.77.

The complete ECAF evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 5 August 2011, for review and comment within 
30 days. As of this date, this office has not received a 
response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 
law or regulations.

2. The application was timely filed. 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting 
the relief sought in this application.  Although it does appear 
the applicant was miscounseled regarding the amount of 
reimbursement she could expect to receive for a Personally 
Procured Move, she was fully compensated for her move and in 
reality received a de facto incentive through remission of the 
debt she incurred for the excess advance she initially received.  
We believe this constitutes proper and fitting relief.  
Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of PPA 
HQ/ECAF and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion 
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice 
warranting further action by this Board.  In the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the relief sought in this application.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 
that the application will only be reconsidered upon the 
submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered 
with this application.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-01334 in Executive Session on 9 Feb 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Vice Chair
	, Member
		, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Mar 11, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  PPA HQ/ECAF, Letter, dated 26 Jul 11.
	Exhibit C.  SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 5 Aug 11. 




								
								Vice Chair