RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01077
INDEX NUMBER: 128.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be reimbursed for expenses incurred due to the erroneous shipment
of his privately owned vehicle (POV).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
When his traffic management office (TMO) briefed him on his POV
shipping entitlements for a permanent change of station move to New
Zealand, he was advised that he could ship the POV, but was not told
of any restrictions. When his vehicle arrived in New Zealand, the
Land Transport Inspector informed him that his car could not be
driven because it lacked airbags. He applied for, but was denied a
waiver. His local TMO representative also advised him that he would
not be reimbursed for any expenses related to the shipment of his
vehicle.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of shipping
documents, his efforts to obtain a waiver, documentation verifying
that he was not advised of the restrictions on shipping vehicles to
New Zealand, and copies of receipts for a rental car and work done on
his POV.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a technical sergeant (TSgt) serving on active duty.
Per Special Order AA-1299, the applicant was reassigned on a PCS move
to New Zealand. He was authorized to and shipped his POV. After
arrival of his POV in country, he discovered that his POV did not
meet the standards for operation in New Zealand.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
JPPSO/ECAF recommends that the applicant be authorized shipment of
his vehicle from New Zealand to the CONUS.
Since the applicant’s POV did not meet the standards for operations
in New Zealand without major modifications, he was entitled to ship
the vehicle from his assignment at the time to the CONUS for storage.
Paragraph U5466 of the Joint Federal Travel Regulations (JFTR)
provides that a member is eligible to have one POV stored at a
storage facility if the laws, regulations, or other restrictions
imposed by a foreign country or the United States preclude shipment
or entry of a motor vehicle at Government expense into that foreign
country or the vehicle would require modification (other than normal
maintenance servicing) as a condition to entry into the foreign
country.
Regarding the applicant’s request for rental reimbursement, the JFTR
only authorizes up to $30.00 per day for a maximum of seven days when
the POV does not arrive at the authorized destination by the
designated delivery date. The circumstances in the applicant’s case
do not meet the intent of the law for reimbursement.
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
11 Jun 04 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice regarding the applicant’s request
for complete reimbursement of expenses related to the erroneous
shipment of his privately owned vehicle. It appears that the
applicant is seeking a total of $300.15 for repairs made to his
vehicle and another $838.00 for reimbursement of rental car expense.
While it does appear that the applicant’s problems were caused by his
gaining unit’s failure to request an update of the Personal Property
Consignment Instruction Guide (PPCIG) and to insure that the
applicant had current information on the restrictions on vehicles
shipped to New Zealand, the JFTR does not authorize reimbursement for
the items the applicant is seeking.
4. Notwithstanding the above determination, sufficient relevant
evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or
injustice warranting a measure of relief. In that regard, we concur
with the recommendation of JPPSO/ECAF that the applicant’s POV
shipping entitlement be reinstated and that the applicant be
authorized to ship his POV from New Zealand to the Continental United
States for storage. Additionally, while unable to reimburse the
applicant for the total cost of his rental car expense, we believe
that he should be reimbursed the maximum allowed for rental car
expense, seven days at $30.00 per day for a total of $210.00.
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:
a. His private owned vehicle (POV) was erroneously shipped
from Japan to New Zealand under the authority of Special Order AA-
1299, dated 7 Aug 03, and is authorized to be reshipped from New
Zealand to the appropriate vehicle processing center for storage
under the provisions of the Joint Federal Travel Regulations, Volume
I--Uniformed Service Members, Paragraph U5440-B.
b. His POV did not arrive at the authorized destination by
the designated delivery date and under the provisions of the Joint
Federal Travel Regulations, Volume I--Uniformed Service Members,
Paragraph U5410-D, he is authorized reimbursement for rental of a
motor vehicle in the amount of $210.00.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2004-
01077 in Executive Session on 21 July 2004, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Feb 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, JPPSO/ECAF, dated 4 Jun 04,
w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jun 04.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2004-01077
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 XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX, be corrected to show that:
a. His private owned vehicle (POV) was erroneously shipped
from Japan to New Zealand under the authority of Special Order AA-1299,
dated 7 Aug 03, and is authorized to be reshipped from New Zealand to
the appropriate vehicle processing center for storage under the
provisions of the Joint Federal Travel Regulations, Volume I--Uniformed
Service Members, Paragraph U5440-B.
b. His POV did not arrive at the authorized destination by
the designated delivery date and under the provisions of the Joint
Federal Travel Regulations, Volume I--Uniformed Service Members,
Paragraph U5410-D, he is authorized reimbursement for rental of a motor
vehicle in the amount of $210.00.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02111
He did not ship a vehicle at government expense using his orders, as was his entitlement. He used the same company to ship his POV that the government uses to transport motor vehicles from Honolulu to Los Angeles; however, he paid less than the government contract would have cost. He elected to pay $948 to ship his POV from Honolulu, HI, to Los Angeles, CA, at personal expense.
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00760
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Para U5410-A provides that when a POV shipment is authorized, one POV not to exceed 20 measurement tons may be transported from the POV port or vehicle processing center (VPC) serving the old permanent duty station (PDS) to the unloading port/VPC serving the new PDS. However, other than his own assertions, he has provided no evidence substantiating his claims.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03390
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was advised by the traffic management office (TMO) at Spangdahlem Air Base (AB), Germany, that he could ship his vehicle at personal expense and be reimbursed up to what it would cost the government to ship the vehicle. In addition to shipping his POV at personal expense without authorization from the TMO, the applicant did not use a United States (U.S.) flag vessel to ship the POV. The applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02335
As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00430
For members departing Goodfellow AFB who wish to take a vehicle on the AMHS ferry, the member calls the AMHS office direct to obtain a reservation. The TMO at Goodfellow AFB states the applicant discussed travel by POV via the AMHS ferry with them but decided against it and requested an airline ticket. Had he indicated he wished to ship his POV via the AMHS ferry, he would have had to have a reservation prior to departing his origin base, accompany his POV, and he would not have been...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | Bc-2004-03359
However, his assignment was changed due to emergency reasons while he was on leave, enroute, requiring him to pay the additional cost of getting his vehicle returned to the original shipping port and then paying the additional expense of shipping it to his new PCS assignment. If the applicant had used his authorized entitlement to ship his POV to Hawaii at Government expense, when the assignment was changed, the vehicle would have been shipped to the new destination at no cost to him. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02292
The applicant states he was reimbursed fully for his move from Seymour Johnson to his home of record, but not for his move from his home of record to the Academy. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AF/DPDFP recommends the applicant be reimbursed a total of $82.15 for the shipment of items from his home of record to the Academy. However, the Board agrees with the recommendation by HQ AF/DPDFP to reimburse the applicant in the amount of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00761
Flag carrier service is not available must be provided to the member and must be attached to the request for reimbursement. As to the applicant’s request for reimbursement for the mileage of this vehicle, we concur with the JPPSO-SAT/ECAF assessment and are of the opinion that the applicant should be reimbursed for the mileage to get the vehicle to the POV port or vehicle processing center serving the old permanent duty station, since it appears that he would have been entitled to...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05924
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...