RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01319
INDEX CODE: 128
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He receive a remission of indebtedness of the excess weight of
household goods (HHG) shipment.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time of his household goods shipment, he was stationed overseas
at Incirlik Air Base, Turkey serving an unaccompanied tour. His wife
was left to contact the Traffic Management Office (TMO) to get
assistance with the move. At no time did anyone from TMO explain to
his wife that the maximum weight for the household goods was 9,000
pounds. Applicant also states that there were two trucks used for the
shipment of his goods.
Applicant’s submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by
the appropriate Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR).
Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of
Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Plans & Operations Division, Joint Personal Property
Shipping Office, JPPSO/XO, states that the applicant has not provided
any information to support a probable error or injustice. The
shipment was weighed at origin and again at destination and he
received the benefit of the lower destination weight. Both weights
were obtained on certified scales and the weight tickets were signed
by weightmasters operating under the authority of the states of Iowa
and Arizona. When it is impractical to obtain scale weights for a
shipment, the Comptroller General of the United States approved
obtaining a shipment weight through the constructive method of using
40 pounds per inventory line item. This method is generally supported
by the carrier industry. The main portion of the applicant’s shipment
contained 440 line items. Applying the constructive method of 40
pounds per line item would produce a shipment weight of 17,600 pounds.
Recommend denial of applicant’s request.
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
19 July 1999 for review and response within 30 days. As of this date,
no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice warranting remission of the
applicant’s indebtedness. It appears that the applicant was serving
in an overseas unaccompanied assignment and had planned to return to
Iowa in time to assist his spouse in the packing of his household
goods. However, the packing company packed all the goods in one day
prior to his return; therefore, he was not given the opportunity to
sort through his belongings before they were packed to determine if
some could be discarded. Further, he states that his spouse was not
informed of the maximum weight for the household goods and there also
appeared to be a discrepancy regarding items listed on the inventory
listing. Complicating matters, the household goods had to be placed
on two different vehicles. We believe there was an injustice to the
applicant in that his spouse was possibly not informed of the maximum
allowable weight to be shipped and, the applicant arrived home the day
after all the packing was completed. We note that neither applicant
nor his spouse were advised that they could possibly be overweight
until he received notice from finance, thereby creating a hardship on
him and his family. Therefore, in an effort to remove any possibility
of an injustice to the applicant, we believe that the applicant should
not be held accountable for the excess weight of his household goods
and recommend his records be corrected to the extent indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the U. S. Government
Bill of Lading (GBL) YP-712326, dated 29 April 1997, be amended by
adding 5,300 pounds for professional books, papers and equipment
(PBP&E).
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 4 November 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Member
Ms. Melinda J. Loftin, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Apr 99, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, JPPSO/XO, dated 22 Jun 99, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Jul 99.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
INDEX CODE: 128
AFBCMR 99-01319
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:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to MATTHEW J. VENECHUK, 397-82-7542, be corrected to
show that the U. S. Government Bill of Lading (GBL) YP-712326, dated
29 April 1997, be amended by adding 5,300 pounds for professional
books, papers and equipment (PBP&E).
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
The shipment had an origin net weight of 16,345 pounds. According to JPPSO, the applicant did not provide any information to support an error or injustice by transportation personnel that increased the weight of his HHG. At origin, the shipment had a net weight of 16,370 pounds.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02023
Since the letter was provided more than six months following the delivery of the shipment, ECAF contacted the carrier, only to discover that the carrier representative who signed the statement was not familiar with the shipment and that she, at the applicant’s request, identified items of PBP&E on the inventory per his request. In this case, reviews of the inventories reveal there were no items identified as PBP&E during the move. Following receipt of ECAF’s 14 May 2004 letter, he...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01823
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01823 INDEX CODE: 128.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The excess unaccompanied baggage (UB) costs for shipment of his household goods (HHG) be corrected to eliminate costs of professional books, papers, and equipment (PBP&E) and the remaining excess costs...
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,...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). He states that at the time of shipment he estimated he had 10 pounds of PBP&E. Should the board decide to grant the relief sought, the records may be changed to state the household goods shipment that moved under Government Bill of Lading VP-486,927 dated 9 Nov 95, contained 975 pounds of professional books, papers, and equipment.
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1996-02029
Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Director, Joint Personal Property Shipping Office, JPPSO-SAT/DIR, reviewed this application and recommended denial. ECAF again reviewed the case and based on claim documentation, they granted a weight credit of 493 pounds for missing and irreparably damaged items under GBL VP-154,889 and 108 pounds for items...
Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Director, Joint Personal Property Shipping Office, JPPSO-SAT/DIR, reviewed this application and recommended denial. ECAF again reviewed the case and based on claim documentation, they granted a weight credit of 493 pounds for missing and irreparably damaged items under GBL VP-154,889 and 108 pounds for items...
Therefore, at the time of his PCS the member’s weight allowance for the shipping of HHGs was 4,225 pounds, plus 1,100 pounds of UB. There has been no evidence submitted to show that he informed the destination site that his shipment exceeded the weight allowed for the shipping of his HHGs, nor did he request to have his shipment reweighed. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...
Using the cube rule, ECAF increased the weight for professional books, papers, and equipment (PBP&G), from 50 pounds to 960 pounds for the unaccompanied baggage (UB) shipment and credited 457 pounds for missing and irreparably damaged items for the household goods (HHG) shipment that moved from Germany to England. JPPSO/CC indicates the applicant submitted an amendment to his original application in which he states he made another PCS move from England back to Germany and he was not...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03906
When a member declares PBP&E and the carrier fails to record and weigh the items, credit may be given if the traffic management office (TMO) documents the items and weight upon delivery. Review of the applicant’s HHG inventory and other shipping documents reveal that no items were identified as PBP&E during the shipment in question. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force...