RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00664
INDEX CODE: 128.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The Government pay for a year of nontemporary storage for his Household
Goods (HHG) and associated charges for packing, drayage, handling, and
packing materials.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He retired on 1 July 2000 after 30 years in the Air Force. Before
retirement, he attended counseling on entitlements by the Beale AFB, CA
Transition Assistance Program and by the Beale AFB Transportation
Management Office. He was also told he had up to a year to move to his
home of selection (HOS) and this could be extended upon application. At no
time did anyone inform him verbally or in writing that his entitlement for
transportation or storage of household goods had any non-extendable
expiration date. He understands the Government paid $1.00 per pound per
month to store his household goods. It paid $109.20 per month to store his
10,920 pounds of household goods for 14 months for a total of $1,528.80.
Since he was only entitled to 12 months of storage (costing $1,310.40), he
believes his total debt for excess storage of his HHG should be $218.40 not
$2,074.80 for 19 months he was originally billed for, nor the $2,889.60
JPPSO-SAT now says he should pay.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 30 June 2000, the applicant was relieved from active duty and on 1 July
2000 he retired in the grade of chief master sergeant. He served 30 years
and 6 days of total active military service.
In May 2001, the applicant requested and was granted an extension of the
one-year time limit to move to his HOS. The time limit was extended to 30
June 2002. In May 2002, due to still being unemployed, the applicant
requested and was granted another extension of the time limit to move to
his HOS. The time limit was extended to 30 June 2003.
On 28 November 2001, the applicant placed 10,920 pounds of household goods
in nontemporary storage (NTS). The goods remained in storage until 23
January 2003 and were then shipped to Tucson, AZ. As entitlements to NTS
at Government expense terminate one year following the release from active
duty, the applicant was billed $2,074.80 for the unauthorized storage.
Later, warehouse handling and wardrobe cartons were added, increasing the
cost to $2,889.60.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AF/JPPSO indicated HOS benefits are not open-ended entitlements that the
retired member retains until used. In decision B-207157, dated 2 February
1983, the Comptroller General held that Congress intended HOS benefits be
directly related to the member’s separation/retirement from active service.
While Congress provides for extension of the time limit for travel to a
HOS under certain conditions, for extensions under paragraph U5365-F, there
is no authority to extend the Government’s obligation to pay storage cost
occurring more than a year after termination of active duty. However,
since the time limit to move to the HOS was extended by competent
authority, they believe the member should receive the travel and
transportation entitlements.
If the board agrees, they recommend the records be changed to authorize the
packing, warehouse handling, line-haul charges to Arizona, and delivery
cost at destination. However, the applicant is responsible for the storage
cost for 10,920 pounds at a rate of $1.00 per hundredweight for 14.5 months
for a total cost of $1,583.40.
The evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 7 May 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant 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.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of an error or injustice warranting partial relief. The Board
agrees with the Air Force and adopts their rationale as the basis for our
conclusion. Since the applicant’s time to move to his HOS was extended by
competent authority, we believe the applicant should receive the travel and
transportation entitlement. However, with respect to storage cost, we note
this is not an indefinite entitlement and as such, there is no authority to
extend the Government’s obligation to pay storage costs occurring more than
one year after termination of active duty. It is further noted the
applicant was advised in May 2001 that his HOS extension did not apply to
NTS of his HHGs. Therefore, we believe it is the applicant’s
responsibility to pay the storage costs. In view of the above, we
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 Government Bill of Lading, ZY-
088121, dated 20 December 2002, was amended in block 30 - Charges, to
reflect total charges of $1,306.20.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-
00664 in Executive Session on 14 July 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 February 2004, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Military Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, JPPSO, dated 28 April 2004.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 May 2004.
OLGA M. CRERAR
Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2004-00664
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 , be corrected to show that the Government Bill of Lading, ZY-
088121, dated 20 December 2002, was amended in block 30 - Charges, to
reflect total charges of $1,306.20.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-01038
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. _________________________________________________________________ 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. After a complete review of the evidence of record, we believe that...
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.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02814
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...
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026099
The member rents normal types of rental vehicles, equipment, moving aids, and packing material and the member performs all labor for the move. The evidence of record shows the applicant was authorized to perform a PPM from Fort Richardson to Fort Carson. It is reasonable to presume that had the applicant actually performed the move himself, without the aid of ABF, there would not have been an issue with his claim and he would have been entitled to the advance payment, as well as his full...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011614C071029
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.
According to JPPSO, the applicant’s HHG shipment exceeded the maximum authorized weight allowance and in accordance with paragraph U5340, JFTR, she is liable for all transportation costs arising from transportation of HHG in excess of the authorized allowance. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant, after the death of her husband, a former service member, shipped HHG from Virginia to Colorado with a net weight of 29,200 pounds, including 3,057 pounds for the shipment of a POV. ...
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...