RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03153
INDEX CODE: 128.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The weight of his household goods (HHGs) shipment be reduced from 11,935
pounds to 11,060 pounds.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT 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.
________________________________________________________________
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 office of the Air Force at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
JPPSO/CC reviewed this application and recommended denial. A complete copy
of the evaluation, with attachments, 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 15 Feb
02 for review and comment 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.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence
of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, the majority of
the Board agrees with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for
their conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or
injustice. There being insufficient evidence to the contrary, the majority
of the Board finds no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought in this application
________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:
A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice
and recommends the application be denied.
________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket No. 01-03153 in
Executive Session on 26 March 2002, under the provisions of Air Force
Instruction 36-2603:
Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Panel Chair
Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
Mr. Christopher Carey, Member
The majority of the Board voted to deny the application. Mr. Sheuerman
voted to grant the requested relief, but does not wish to submit a minority
report. The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Oct 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, JPPSO/CC, dated 5 Feb 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Feb 02.
PHILIP SHEUERMAN
Panel Chair
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)
SUBJECT: Docket No: 01-03153
I have carefully considered all the circumstances of this case and do
not agree with the majority members of the panel that the applicant’s
request should be denied.
The majority of the panel are not convinced that the applicant should
be provided relief from the expense incurred as a result of the shipment of
his household goods (HHGs) in excess of his prescribed weight allowance.
The Joint Personal Property Shipping Office (JPPSO) recommended denial of
the appeal stating, in part, that in similar situations, the Comptroller
General has held that the probability that an error occurred in the weight
certificate when the goods were reshipped is equal to the probability that
an error occurred when the goods were shipped from origin. The majority of
the Board agrees with this rationale and accepts it as their basis for the
concluding that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or
injustice. I disagree.
I note that in conjunction with the applicant’s retirement, 11,935
pounds of HHGs and 1,281 pounds of unaccompanied baggage were shipped from
the Netherlands to Oklahoma. However, when the same HHGs were reshipped
from Oklahoma to his home of selection (i.e., Sierra Vista, AZ) they only
weighed 11,060 pounds. In addition, a reweigh of his unaccompanied baggage
in Oklahoma produced a lower weight of 1,263 pounds, which did not include
professional books, papers, and equipment (PBP&E).
While I agree with the position held by Comptroller General in
similar cases that errors during either the original shipment or reshipment
are equally probable, in view of the fact that each time the applicant’s
HHGs were weighed a different weight was recorded, I believe equity
dictates that any doubt should be resolved in the his behalf. I have,
therefore, decided that the requested relief is warranted.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AFBCMR 01-03153
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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the shipment moved under
Government Bill of Lading AP-271032, dated 23 March 2000, contained 966
pounds of professional books, papers, and equipment (PBP&E).
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
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...
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...
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 | 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...
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...
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.
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. Applicant filed a rebuttal to her indebtedness claiming she did not get credit for all of her PBP&E, a mattress was missing, items were misidentified on the inventory, and questioning the validity of the shipment weight. The Excess Cost Adjudication Function (ECAF) reviewed her rebuttal and credited her with 363...
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. At no time did anyone from TMO explain to his wife that the maximum weight for the household goods was 9,000 pounds. As of this date, no...