RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01038
INDEX NUMBER: 128.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His indebtedness to the government in the amount of $1,452.91 for
shipment of personal property in excess of his entitlement be
cancelled.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was led to believe that filing the paperwork for his Do-It-Yourself
(DITY) move was the proper thing to do and does not understand why the
weight for items that he personally carried are being added to his
household goods (HHG) shipment.
He is being charged storage for items that were never in storage.
When he filed his DITY move claim, he should have been paid for
carrying 175 pounds (lbs.), vice 1660 lbs.
When he sent in his rebuttal to the excess costs, the only response he
received was an increase in his total debt from $1364.09 to $1452.91
for shipment of a desk with his professional gear. One hundred fifty
lbs. were disallowed for the desk without the desk actually being
weighed.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant retired from the Air Force in the grade of senior master
sergeant effective 1 Nov 01. On 3 Jul 01, under authorization of his
retirement orders, the applicant placed 17,660 pounds of household
goods in nontemporary storage (NTS), which remained there until 14 Jan
02, and were then shipped to his home of selection. Upon shipment the
property weighed 17,860 pounds and upon reweigh at destination 17,080
pounds. The applicant also accomplished a DITY move and was paid for
movement of 1,660 lbs. After allowing the applicant credit for his
professional gear (2,274 lbs.) and packing allowance (1,481 lbs.), it
was determined that the total amounts of goods the applicant moved on
his orders totaled 14,985 lbs., 1,485 lbs. in excess of his authorized
weight limit of 13,500 lbs. After adding packing weight, the
applicant was 1650 lbs. over his authorized allowance. The applicant
was billed $689.40 for packed excess weight as a percentage of total
weight (1,650 lbs. of 17,080) and $675.69 for excess nontemporary
storage cost as a percentage of total nontemporary storage costs. The
applicant submitted a rebuttal to the Excess Cost Adjudication
Function (ECAF). After again reviewing the applicant’s case file, it
was determined that he had actually shipped an additional 150 lbs. of
excess weight. This was based on his having been given an allowance
of 150 lbs. in his professional gear for a desk, which was not
authorized. The applicant was now billed $752.07 for packed excess
weight as a percentage of total weight (1,800 lbs. of 17,080) and
$700.84 for excess nontemporary storage cost as a percentage of total
nontemporary storage costs. His total indebtedness is $1452.91.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
JPPSO/ECAF recommends that the excess cost charges associated with
shipment of the applicant’s household goods be reduced from $1452.91
to $942.26. Because the amount of weight stored by Government
arrangement exceeded the applicant’s authorized weight allowance, he
must return the unauthorized payment he received for transporting some
of the household goods himself and reimburse the Government for the
excess storage charges while the goods were in storage.
In accordance with the Air Force supplement to the Joint Federal
Travel Regulation (JFTR), when there are multiple shipments involved,
members may be billed on the shipment or storage lot that results in
the least cost to the member. After using the least cost method, the
applicant’s total indebtedness was reduced to $942.26.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
18 Jul 03 for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response
has not been received.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. After a complete review of the
evidence of record, we believe that the excess cost charges for
movement of the applicant’s household goods were computed correctly.
However, in instances of multiple shipments, the JFTR allows the costs
to be billed on the shipment or storage lot that results in the least
cost to the member. In that regard, we concur with the recommendation
offered by JPPSO/ECAF to reduce the applicant’s excess cost charges
from $1,452.91 to $942.26. We took note of the applicant’s contentions
and believe that the evaluation provided by JPPSO/ECAF adequately
explains the circumstances that led to the excess cost charges.
Therefore, we recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected as
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 excess cost
charges associated with the household goods moved under the
authorization of Special Order AC-002886, dated 8 December 2000,
is $942.26 vice $1,452.91.
_______________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-
01038 in Executive Session on 6 October 2003, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Panel Chair
Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
Ms. Ann-Cecile McDermott, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Mar 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, JPPSO/ECAF, dated 10 Jul 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 03.
MARILYN THOMAS
Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2003-01038
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 XXXXXXXX, XXX-XX-XXXX, be corrected to show that
the excess cost charges associated with the household goods moved
under the authorization of Special Order AC-002886, dated 8
December 2000, is $942.26 vice $1,452.91.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
Regarding the three different weights of his household goods, the Comptroller General has ruled in similar cases that evidence of the weight of household effects when placed in nontemporary storage is not determinative of the member’s liability because a higher weight when the goods are taken out of storage may be due to several factors, including the use of different scales, the use of storage material which is not removed before shipping, and moisture absorption while in storage. This...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01035a
He made two shipments of personal property from Korea to San Antonio, TX. Considering the weight credits for packing materials and professional books, papers, and equipment, he exceeded the prescribed weight allowance for his grade by 450 pounds, incurring the excess cost charge of $409.99. He now requests relief of the portion of his debt resulting from exceeding his maximum weight allowance.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits AF Form 899, Request and Authorization for Permanent Change of Station - Military; Request and Authorization for Change of Administrative Orders; Application for Shipment and/or Storage of Personal Property; letter, ECAF- B, dated 23 May 96; Government Bill of Lading; Pay Adjustment Authorization; Applicant’s letter, dated 19 Dec 98; and letter, ECAF, dated 9 Feb 99. The Board notes that at the time of his PCS, the applicant was an E-3, had...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02632
The applicant was authorized 17,000 lbs under the Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR), resulting in net excess weight shipped of 2,746 lbs. The applicant states that his request for an inspector and for a reweigh of his HHGs was not granted. ________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be 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. ...
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...
He further states that on previous moves he had around 3,500 pounds of professional gear. He has been given credit for 4,108 pounds of professional gear and his debt was reduced from $3,122.62 to $1458.89. It appears to the Board that the applicant’s case was fairly evaluated and that he has received appropriate relief.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00839
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS-POCC/DE recommends denial and states after contacting the Remissions and Waiver Branch for a recommendation, that office notified them had they received the applicant’s remission request prior to his separation, they would have recommended the debt be collected in full. Applying this method to the fourth shipment produced a net weight of 3,120 pounds (78 inventory times 40 pounds), at a cost of...
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-2004-02466
Applicant’s HHGs have been in storage since May 95. However, the Air Force paid the fees associated with this error for over two years. Subsequently, the applicant was placed on notice the responsibility for payment of storage fees on his household goods was his.