Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703195
Original file (9703195.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved
. "  

1 

4 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DEC @ 8 1998 

DOCKET NUMBER:  97-03195 
COUNSEL:  None 
HEARING DESIRED:  No 

PPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: 
The Application for Shipment and/or Storage of Personal Property, 
DD  Form  1299,  dated  12  June  1996,  be  amended  in  Block  10, 
Destination  Information, to  reflect  "Denver, Colorado,,, rather 
than, "Colorado Springs , Colorado. 

PPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or 
unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at 
Exhibit A. 

STAT EMENT 0 F FACTS: 
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from 
the  applicant's military  records, are  contained  in  the  letter 
prepared  by  the  appropriate  office  of  the  Air  Force. 
Accordingly,  there  is  no  need  to  recite  these  facts  in  this 
Record of Proceedings. 

The Director, Joint Personal Property Shipping Office, JPPSO/DIR, 
reviewed  this  application  and  states  that  when  the  applicant 
first contacted the Traffic Management  Office  (TMO) to arrange 
for the shipment of his HHG, he did not have a destination so  he 
requested  nontemporary  storage  (NTS) .  At  his  counseling, the 
destination  was  changed  from  NTS  to  Colorado  Springs  at  the 
applicant s  request.  When special routing or services have been 
furnished at the member's  request, the member is to bear the cost 
of  transportation  above  the  maximum  amount  authorized  at 
Government expense based on the cost of shipping the HHG without 
the  special routing  or  services.  In the  applicant's  case, he 
incurred  excess  cost  in  requesting  special  services  in  the 

c. 

delivery  of  his  HHG  from  temporary  storage  to  a  destination 
beyond  the  30-mile  radius  for  a  local  delivery.  Since  the 
applicant  requested  shipment  of  his  Household  Goods  (HHG) to 
Colorado Springs and desired to have them delivered from storage 
to a destination beyond the 30-mile radius for a local delivery, 
he  must  be  held  responsible  for  the  difference  in  cost. 
Therefore, they recommend denial of his request. 
A  complete  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  is  attached  at 
Exhibit C . 

%. 

PPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE  EVAJiUATION: 
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 9 March 1998, for review and response.  As of this 
date, no response has been received by this office. 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 

1. 
law or regulations. 
2.  The application was timely filed. 
3 .   Sufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  a  probable  error  or  injustice. 
After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the 
applicant's  contentions, we believe the applicant's options with 
respect  to  the  shipment of  his  household goods  (HHG) may  have 
been  misrepresented.  In  this  respect, we  note  the  applicant 
he  had  the  option  of 
states  that  he  was  advised  b 
storing his HHG 
but at no time during 
ion  made  as  to  where  in 
the  discussion 
addition, the 
he had 
applicant was la 
JPPSO  handled 
storage  for  the 
ent  from  the 
individual  that  counseled  the  applicant  would  be  helpful  in 
deciding this case, in view of the circumstances of this case, we 
believe  any doubt  should  be  decided  in  the  applicant's  favor. 
Therefore, we  recommend his records be  corrected to the extent 
indicated below. 

THE BOA RD RECOMMENDS THAT : 
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the Application 
for Shipment and/or Storage of Personal Property, DD Form  1299, 
dated  12  June  1996,  be  amended  in  Block  10,  Destination 

- 

2 

Information,  to  reflect  "Denver, 
"Colorado Springs, Colorado. 

rather  than, 

The following members of the Board considered this application in 
Executive Session on 19 August 1998, under the provisions of AFI 
36-2602 : 

-. 

Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair 
Mr. Walter J. Hosey, Member 
Mr. Henry Romo, Jr. , Member 
Mr. Phillip E. Horton, Examiner (without vote) 
as recommended. 

All  members voted  to correct the records, 
following documentary evidence was considered: 

The 

Exhibit A. 
Exhibit B, 
Exhibit C.  Letter, JPSSO/DIR, dated 12 Feb 97. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 9 Mar 98, 

DD Form 149, dated 10 Oct 97, w/atchs. 
Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

/ 

Panel Chair 

3 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

WASHINGTON, D. C. 

DEC 0 8 1998 

Office of the Assistant Secretary 

AFBCMR 97-03 195 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF 

Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for 

Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States 
Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that: 

records of the Department of the Air Force relating 
rrected to show that the Application for Shipmen 
1299, dated 12 June 1996, be amended in Block 10, Destination 

Information, to reflect “Denver, Colorado,” rather than, “Colorado Springs, Colorado.” 

/ Director 

Air Force Review Boards Agency 



Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011614C071029

    Original file (20060011614C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Roland S. Venable | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. He was told by the Yongsan, Korea transportation office that the shipment [papers] showed delivery, but he would have to contact the Colorado transportation office for an exact delivery date. He stated he was told in Korea that a delivery date had to be entered on the DD Form 1299.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802672

    Original file (9802672.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    It appears that in each instance that the applicant requested an extension for non-temporary storage (NTS) of his household goods (HHG), he was informed that the request for extension was approved; however, he was not advised there would be a cost to him commencing one year after termination of active duty. However, JPPSO/DIR states that they would support storage entitlement to 6 October 1997, the time he was informed of the debt and the applicant would be responsible for storage costs in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703541

    Original file (9703541.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC 3UN 3 0 Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 97-03541 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is directed that: records of ment of the Air The pertinent Force relating to show that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003308

    Original file (0003308.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to DD Form 139, Pay Adjustment Authorization, dated 19 Dec 2000, the applicant incurred excess cost for long delivery out of storage in transit from Montgomery, AL to Auburn, AL. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Commander, Joint Personal Property Shipping Office, JPPSO/CC, recommended denial. If the applicant had requested shipment of his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9600580

    Original file (9600580.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thus, once the applicant's HHG shipment departed Germany, there was no opportunity to divert the shipment until it arrived at the port of Long Beach. VP-119,872 with a net weight of 13,364 pound was charged a total of $969.00 for excess di ore of Abilene TX Loma Linda CA vice the authorized destination he ade c. After arriving in'the US,-traveled to Tulsa OK. On 1 June 1994, he visited the Traffic Management Office (TMO) at Dyess AFB TX and requested the HHG shipment that was en route to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800610

    Original file (9800610.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00610 t-tkil 51999 HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The additional "Excess Cost" of $334.11 she was assessed for shipping her Household Goods (HHG) to Wichita, KS, vice Kansas City, MO, be eliminated. Therefore, regardless of the shipment weight, the applicant would have still incurred excess cost charges to ship the property to the alternate destination. JPPSO-DTR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02814

    Original file (BC-2005-02814.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The entitlement begins on the date the orders are issued and terminates one year from the date of termination of active duty. However, evidence shows the applicant agreed to have his HHG shipped to Lancaster, CA, upon his separation from active duty and subsequently requested an extension of storage until 23 December 2005. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01713

    Original file (BC 2014 01713.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is included at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: PPA HQ/ECAF recommends approval. Should the board agree, the record should be changed to reflect the applicant's property was released from storage in transit on 5 August 2013, and the debt for NTS after the one year time...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900981

    Original file (9900981.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Normally, when the carrier arrives at destination, they contact the destination transportation office who coordinate the delivery with the military member. According to JPPSO/XO, the applicant’s shipment exceeded the prescribed weight allowance as evidence by two sets of weight tickets, one at origin and one at destination. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 16 Nov 99,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002772

    Original file (0002772.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She indicated on her DD Form 1299, Application for Shipment and/or Storage of Personal Property, that her shipment would contain professional items. In support of her request applicant provided a memorandum from the Quality Assurance office; her excess cost rebuttal adjudication letter; DD Forms 139, Pay Adjustment Authorization; DD Form 1299; AF Form 767, Extended Active Duty Order; and, Notification of Indebtedness letter. ...