Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03051
Original file (BC-2003-03051.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03051
            INDEX CODE:  128.14
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His entitlement to move to his home-of-selection (HOS) be restored.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to an administrative error, his entitlement was  lost  when  his  travel
and household goods (HHGs) shipment costs were  charged  to  his  retirement
orders, rather then  permanent  change-of-station  (PCS)  without  permanent
change-of-assignment (PCA) orders.  He  was  assigned  to  a  geographically
separated unit in Moscow  and  elected  to  travel  to  Hickam  AFB,  HI  to
outprocess.  When he departed Moscow he moved using his  retirement  orders,
which he later found out should not  have  happened.   One  month  after  he
moved, PCS without PCA orders were issued.  He did not  discover  the  error
until he recently tried to have his HHGs moved to  his  final  HOS  and  was
told that he already used his entitlement.  He was not properly briefed  nor
provided the proper documents in a timely manner.  He has been  recalled  to
active duty with his current term set to end on 31 May 04.

In support of his request, applicant  provided  a  copy  of  his  retirement
order, a copy of his PCS without PCA order,  and  a  chronology  of  events.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data extracted from the Personnel Data System  reflects  the  applicant  was
appointed s second lieutenant, Reserve of the Air Force on  19  Nov  74  and
was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty on that same date.   He  has
been progressively promoted to the grade of  colonel,  having  assumed  that
grade, effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jul 97.

He received an approved retirement  effective  1  Nov  01  and  orders  were
published authorizing him to  proceed  to  his  home  of  selection.   While
stationed in Russia, applicant elected to retire at  Hickam  AFB  Hi,  (port
retirement).  Upon arrival  at  Hickam,  he  completed  his  travel  voucher
(which by traveling with his spouse and doing so rendered  his  move  a  HOS
move).  Subsequent to his HOS move, orders were published authorizing a  PCS
without PCA move from Russia to Hawaii.  On 4 Jun 02, orders were  published
recalling him back to active duty assigning  him  to  Russia;  however,  his
assignment to Russia was diverted and he filled a position  in  Hawaii.   He
currently has an approved retirement effective 1 May 04.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

USAF/DPRCC states that he is desirous of making a HHG move now  rather  than
waiting until he is retired for a second time.  If the Board  were  to  rule
that he did not make a HOS move on his first retirement; he still could  not
use that first retirement order to make a move now  because  he  received  a
new order ordering him back to active duty.  In  accordance  with  the  JFTR
U5330-H, the original retirement order remained in effect until he  received
further PCS orders.  He received further PCS orders recalling  him  back  to
active duty in June 2002.  Once he was recalled to active duty the  original
retirement order could no longer be used.  DPRCC attempted to obtain a  copy
of the orders assigning him to CINPAC in December 2002 to determine if  that
order authorized shipment of HHGs.  However, the  applicant  stated  in  his
chronology "no new order  was  cut."   Absent  an  order  assigning  him  to
CINPAC, DPRCC recommends  that  the  applicant  wait  until  new  retirement
orders are cut.  The DPRCC evaluation is at Exhibit B.

AFSLMO/CA states that the applicant  should  have  departed  Russia  on  PCS
without PCA orders which would have entitled him  to  travel  and  ship  his
HHGs to Hawaii thus allowing his retirement orders to be used  for  his  HOS
move.  Once his was recalled, assigned to Russia, and  diverted  to  Hawaii,
there should have been an amendment/rescission order that  assigned  him  to
Hawaii.  Approval of this  action  would  result  in  reinstatement  of  his
entitlement to a HOS move and nontemporary storage in conjunction with  JFTR
U5365.  The AFSLMO evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

His intent in 2001 was to retire in Hawaii  from  Moscow.   He  returned  to
Hawaii to a townhouse he owned and planned to move within a year  to  a  new
home on Oahu using his HOS entitlement.  When it became apparent he  was  to
remain on active duty in Hawaii he began to  search  for  a  new  house  and
asked for a HOS move.  That is when he learned about the  loss  of  his  HOS
entitlement due to the administrative error.  He has since  been  completely
priced out of the housing market in Oahu.   His  only  recourse  now  is  to
leave Oahu and buy a home in the continental United  States.   The  approval
of a "local  short  distance  move  of  HHGs"  referred  to  in  the  AFSLMO
memorandum no longer does him any good.   He  no  longer  desires  an  early
move.  He desires reinstatement of his HOS  entitlement  that  would  permit
him to retire in any  state  within  the  continental  United  States.   His
complete submission is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 that would warrant  corrective  action.   In
this respect,  the  applicant  was  stationed  in  Russia  when  he  elected
retirement from the Air Force to be effective  1  Nov  01.   He  elected  to
retire  at  Hickam  AFB,  HI  and  chose  to  reside  in  Hawaii  after  his
retirement.  He and his family  traveled  to  Hawaii  using  his  retirement
orders  as  the  travel  authority.   However,  in  accordance  with  travel
regulations, he should have been provided  PCS  without  PCA  orders,  which
were provided to the applicant subsequent to his travel,  as  the  authority
for his travel.  It appears that his travel to  Hawaii  was  based  in  good
faith on the documentation he was provided at the time  and  the  counseling
he received. We believe the  decision  to  travel  under  authority  of  his
retirement order was inappropriately made through no fault of  his  own  and
that the applicant has suffered an  injustice  with  the  loss  of  his  HOS
privileges.  Accordingly it is our opinion that his  HOS  privileges  should
be restored 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:

      a.  He was authorized travel from Russia  to  Hickam  AFB,  Hawaii  in
2001,  under  Permanent  Change  of  Station  without  Permanent  Change  of
Assignment order, AAB-338, dated 30 September 2001, rather  than  Retirement
Order AL-000623, dated 11 June 2001.

      b.  His entitlement to a Home of Selection  move  under  Joint  Travel
Federal Travel Regulation, paragraph U5365, be restored.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2003-
03051 in Executive Session on 4 Feb 04, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
      Ms. Rita S. Looney, Member
      Ms. Mary Johnson, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Aug 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, USAF/DPRCC, dated 3 Nov 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFSLMO/CA, dated 11 Dec 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 28 Dec 03.




                             MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                             Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-03051




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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

            a.  He was authorized travel from Russia to Hickam AFB, Hawaii
in 2001, under Permanent Change of Station without Permanent Change of
Assignment order, AAB-338, dated 30 September 2001, rather than Retirement
Order AL-000623, dated 11 June 2001.

            b.  His entitlement to a Home of Selection move under Joint
Travel Federal Travel Regulation, paragraph U5365, be, and hereby is,
restored.




                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01115

    Original file (BC-2012-01115.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01115 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retirement order be corrected to include a permanent change of station (PCS) without a change of assignment in order to utilize his one move entitlement for a temporary move to Washington state, then, to his home in South Carolina. ECAF states...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017808

    Original file (20140017808.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Even though he was selected for separation by the SERB, he should have received a new or amended permanent change of station (PCS) order with a different movement designator code (MDC) and authorization for DLA returning him stateside from his assignment in Moscow, Russia in order to properly transition and retire since there were no ACAP services available. A member on active duty is authorized travel and transportation allowances to a home selected by the member from the last PDS when the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04576

    Original file (BC-2012-04576.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    CG B-202023, dated 4 Dec 1981, advises that civilian employees married to members of the uniformed services cannot each receive an entitlement for shipment of the same HHG. 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 office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or...

  • 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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-01263

    Original file (BC-2012-01263.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicant’s military service records, are contained in the Air Force evaluation at Exhibit B. JFTR paragraph U5012-I further clarifies that an extension must not be authorized for approval for more than six years from the date of separation or release from active duty unless a member’s certified ongoing medical condition prevents relocation of the member for longer than six years from the retirement date. Based on the above, they believe an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003397

    Original file (20120003397.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides: * retirement orders, dated 11 December 2007 * recall to active duty orders, dated 15 May 2008 * request for extension of final HHG and NTS entitlements * letter from U.S. Army Installation Management Command, Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison-Redstone, Redstone Arsenal, AL, dated 21 January 2009 * a letter from the Transportation Office, Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison-Redstone, dated 3 January 2012 * request for further extension of final HHG and NTS entitlements *...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010783

    Original file (20110010783.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He states he was not aware of the instructions at the bottom of his retirement order that permitted up to 1 year to choose a home of selection (HOS) and complete his retirement move. The applicant never requested an extension of his entitlement prior to 1 July 2009. Paragraph U5365 does allow for extensions of up to 6 years to a Soldier's shipping entitlement: * for persons undergoing hospitalization or medical treatment, an extension can be granted for the period equal to the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002389

    Original file (20150002389.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He submits copies of his request letters for extension of his HHG transportation entitlements for years 2013 and 2014. Travel and transportation entitlements expire 6 years from the date of retirement. He provides copies of his requests for extension of his entitlement for years 2013 and 2014; however, he failed to provide extension authorization letters from the transportation office.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05924

    Original file (BC 2012 05924.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 March 2011, the Joint Personal Property Shipping Office – Northeast (JPPSO-NE) notified the applicant that his request for an extension was granted until 9 July 2011, a total of 180 days, and that any additional storage time past this date may not be authorized. On 15 June 2011, the applicant was advised that his HHG shipment from Florida in storage at government expense will expire/convert on 9 July 2011. On 17 June 2011, AFPC/DPSIAR notified the applicant and JPPSO-NE that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05924

    Original file (BC 2012 05924.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 March 2011, the Joint Personal Property Shipping Office – Northeast (JPPSO-NE) notified the applicant that his request for an extension was granted until 9 July 2011, a total of 180 days, and that any additional storage time past this date may not be authorized. On 15 June 2011, the applicant was advised that his HHG shipment from Florida in storage at government expense will expire/convert on 9 July 2011. On 17 June 2011, AFPC/DPSIAR notified the applicant and JPPSO-NE that the...