RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00866
INDEX CODE: 128.14
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 Sep 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His spouse’s weight allowance for shipment of her household goods
(HHG) be added to his weight allowance.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The indebtedness for the shipment of his HHG was unjust because it was
the result of miscounseling.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided an expanded statement
and documents pertaining to the shipment of his HHG.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant’s available military personnel records indicate he was
relieved from his reserve assignment on 30 Apr 01 and retired,
effective 1 May 01, in the grade of chief master sergeant. He was
credited with 28 years, 9 months, and 8 days of active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
JPPSO-SAT/ECAF recommended denial noting the applicant was relieved
from a reserve assignment effective 30 April 01 for the purpose of
retirement. In conjunction with his release, he made a shipment of
household goods from San Jose, California, to Orlando, Florida. The
shipment was picked up on 25 Jun 01 and moved under Government Bill
of Lading AP-627912. It had a net weight of 20,300 pounds.
According to JPPSO-SAT/ECAF, the applicant was initially billed
$8,681.45 for exceeding the authorized weight allowance of 14,500
pounds for a member in the grade of E-9 with dependents. He filed a
rebuttal of the charges stating his spouse was also a military member
and he wanted to combine her weight allowance with his entitlement.
He was advised that since his spouse was still on active duty and
without orders, she did not have an entitlement to do so. It was
also determined the applicant did not have any dependents other than
his spouse. Therefore, the weight allowance of 12,000 pounds for an
E-9 without dependents had to be applied. This increased the excess
weight charges to $11,233.80. The governing regulation stipulates
that when a military member is married to another military member,
neither can be counted as being a dependent of the other to increase
any allowance (including HHG weight). If no other dependent exists,
both are members without dependents in determining the weight
allowance.
JPPSO-SAT/ECAF indicated that since orders relieving the applicant’s
spouse from active duty were not issued until 4 Dec 01, the record is
clear she did not have a shipping entitlement when the HHG were
shipped. The Comptroller General has consistently held that any
action a member takes in anticipation of a PCS, but prior to the
issuance of orders, is done for the member’s convenience and does not
obligate the government to pay for services received before orders
are issued.
A complete copy of the JPPSO-SAT/ECAF evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and provided a response
indicating it is unfortunate that due to the technicality of a date on
a retirement order, they owe the government for what should have been
an entitlement for combined military service of 61 years. The
indebtedness he and his spouse has incurred, which was based on
incorrect information they received, has greatly impacted their
retirement plans and standard of living. Therefore, he is requesting
relief due to the great financial hardship. The Board’s common sense
approach to resolving this situation is requested and would be greatly
appreciated.
Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
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 warranting corrective action. The
applicant's complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and his
contentions were duly noted. However, the majority of the Board does
not find the applicant’s assertions or his supporting documentation
sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air
Force office of primary responsibility (OPR). The applicant contends
he was improperly advised regarding the shipment of his HHG. However,
we believe that as a senior enlisted member who was probably not a
novice at moving, he should have been aware of his HHG shipping
entitlements. Therefore, in the absence of sufficient evidence the
applicant was treated differently from others similarly situated, the
majority agrees with the recommendation of the OPR and adopts the
rationale presented as the basis for its decision that the applicant
has failed to sustain his burden of establishing he has suffered
either an error or an injustice. Accordingly, 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 panel finds insufficient evidence of error or
injustice and recommends the application be denied.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-00866 in Executive Session on 6 Jul 05, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Ms. B. J. White-Olson, Panel Chair
Ms. Patricia A. Robey, Member
Mr. Patrick C. Daugherty, Member
By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny the application.
Mr. Daugherty voted to grant the appeal and submitted a minority
report. The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Mar 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, JPPSO-SAT/ECAF, dated 9 May 05.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 May 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, applicant, dated 16 Jun 05.
Exhibit E. Minority Report, dated 20 Jul 05.
B. J. WHITE-OLSON
Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2005-00866
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)
SUBJECT: AFBCMR Application of
I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the
recommendation of the Board members. A majority found that applicant
had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and
recommended the case be denied. I concur with that finding and their
conclusion that relief is not warranted. Accordingly, I accept their
recommendation that the application be denied.
Please advise the applicant accordingly.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards
Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00115
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00115 INDEX CODE: 108.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Mandatory Case Completion Date: 11 Jul 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His indebtedness to the government as a result of the excess weight of his household goods (HHG) shipment be eliminated and he be reimbursed the monies collected. In support of his request,...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00968
He was informed the total authorized weight of HHGs he could ship was 700 pounds. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: JPPSO-SAT/ECAF states that members in the grade of E-3, with dependents, are authorized a weight allowance of 8,000 pounds. He provided no additional evidence to support his claim, therefore, the reconsideration was denied.
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...
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...
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 | CY2007 | BC-2007-02265
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After retiring in Oct 03, she shipped 1000 pounds of her HHGs to her Home of Record (HOR). On 3 Jul 07, applicant submitted a request for extension of the time limitation for her retirement due to unforeseen circumstances; however JPPSO-SAT/ECAF-B denied her request. ___________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket...
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.
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00425
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He believes the record to be unjust because he was unable to insure the movers on the day of the shipment correctly annotated PBP&E on the appropriate shipping documents. It is also unreasonable to believe that a colonel with 24 years of service at the time of PCS and 11 prior PCS moves would not have any PBP&E to ship. LAURENCE M. GRONER Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-00425 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...