RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02292
            INDEX NUMBER:  128.00
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  None

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  No


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  18 Jan 07


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be reimbursed for the total amount of expenses  incurred  stemming
from his reinstatement as a cadet to  the  United  States  Air  Force
Academy (USAFA).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The AFBCMR previously granted him relief  by  reinstating  him  as  a
cadet to the Academy.  At  the  time  his  previous  application  was
approved, he was serving on active duty at Seymour Johnson  AFB,  NC.
Because he would not  be  allowed  to  maintain  the  same  level  of
household goods (HHGs) as a cadet at the Academy as on  active  duty,
he  was  required  to  split  his  HHG  shipment  by  first  shipping
everything to his home of record  and  then  shipping  the  necessary
items to the Academy.

He encountered no logistical problems in making the moves.   However,
his orders only permitted reimbursement for one move.  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.  He notes that there  appears  to  be  no  protocol  for
returning an individual to the Academy from active duty.  He notes he
has turned to the Board for help after exhausting other channels.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 20 Apr 04, the  AFBCMR  considered  and  granted  the  applicant’s
request to be reinstated as a cadet to the Air  Force  Academy.   The
applicant had  been  previously  disenrolled  from  the  Academy  and
ordered to active duty for a period of two years.  The  applicant  is
presently attending the Air Force 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.
Although it appears the applicant is requesting reimbursement in  the
amount of $1407.76, they cannot validate the legitimacy of the  costs
claimed by the applicant.  They note that a receipt provided  by  the
applicant from UPS supports reimbursement for  the  $82.15.   Without
additional supporting documentation from the applicant,  they  cannot
validate his claim.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

JPPSO-SAT/ECAF recommends denial of  the  applicant’s  request.   The
applicant was reassigned from Seymour Johnson, NC to  the  Air  Force
Academy per Special Order A-775.  The Government’s HHG transportation
obligation is limited to the cost of the completed movement  of  HHGs
equal in weight to his weight allowance, or the actual  weight  moved
in one lot between authorized places at the lowest  overall  cost  to
the Government.  The applicant states he transported  680  pounds  of
HHGs  from  New  York  to  Colorado  Springs  at  personal   expense.
Therefore, reimbursement is limited to what it would  have  cost  the
Government to transport 680 pounds of HHGs  from  North  Carolina  to
Colorado  Springs.   Under  the  applicant’s  orders,  there  is   no
authorization to transport HHGs to or from New York, except it  being
the applicant’s designated location and subject to excess cost should
the cost exceed what it would have cost the Government  to  ship  the
property  to  the  authorized  destination.    When   the   applicant
transported his personal property from North Carolina to New York and
received reimbursement  for  it,  he  exhausted  his  entitlement  to
further movement of HHGs at Government expense until  further  orders
are issued.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant responded to the Air Force evaluation  prepared  by  HQ
AF/DPDFP by providing clarification on his move from  North  Carolina
to the Academy.  The applicant noted that he did  not  move  directly
from North Carolina to the Academy, but from North  Carolina  to  New
York, his home of  record,  and  from  there  to  the  Academy.   The
applicant also discusses why his HHGs were not placed in storage  and
why storing them would not have been in  the  best  interest  of  the
Government.  The applicant addresses the four points indicated by  HQ
AF/DPDFP as to why they cannot validate the applicant’s claim:

        a.  Applicant indicates that  the  receipt  he  attached  for
$82.15 was for a trunk he shipped via UPS and that it was a  required
item at the Academy.  If he had not shipped the trunk, he would  have
had to purchase a new one.

        b.  Applicant provided a legible copy of the receipt  he  had
previously provided and provided a list of items  he  transported  in
his POV.

        c.  Applicant provided a list of  the  items  he  moved  from
North Carolina to New York and then to the Academy.

        d.  Applicant provides  an  explanation  of  why  he  shipped
approximately 680 pounds of HHGs from North Carolina to New York  and
then from New York to the Academy.

The applicant notes that based  on  his  understanding  it  has  been
approximately 20 years since someone was taken from active  duty  and
returned to the Academy.  He states that he has been forced  to  bear
the financial burden of approximately  $1400.00  in  travel  expenses
while making approximately $400.00 per month.  He states  he  is  not
trying to gain profit, but to be made whole again and repay the  many
debts accumulated as a result of the move.

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit G.

In his response to the evaluation  prepared  by  JPPSO-SAT/ECAF,  the
applicant states that  he  understands  he  was  not  authorized  two
shipments under the same orders, but had no other  choice.   He  also
acknowledges that his orders assigned him from  Seymour  Johnson  AFB
(SJAFB) to the Academy.  He explains why he did  not  ship  the  HHGs
needed at the Academy directly from SJAFB.

The applicant states that the JFTR did not  allow  for  reimbursement
under the very unique set of circumstances that he shipped  his  HHGs
under.  He reiterates he is not attempting to “make a profit  off  an
unnecessary move,” rather he is attempting to “gain restitution for a
move that was necessary under circumstances  that  were  out  of  the
scope of the JFTR.”

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

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 that would warrant  granting  the
relief requested.  However, the Board agrees with the  recommendation
by HQ AF/DPDFP to reimburse the applicant in the  amount  of  $82.15,
which is supported by the receipt he provided  showing  the  cost  of
shipping his trunk to the  Academy.   Based  on  our  review  of  the
complete evidence submitted by the applicant, we find it insufficient
to justify granting the total of $1407.76  requested.   We  find  the
applicant’s submission somewhat confusing as to what he was  actually
authorized, what he has been paid, and what he believes he should  be
paid.  For example,  as  part  of  the  amount  he  is  seeking,  the
applicant seeks reimbursement for 1714 miles at a rate of  $0.19  per
mile.  In reviewing the documentation available to  us  of  what  the
applicant has already been paid,  we  note  that  the  applicant  has
already been paid for 1714 miles at a rate of  $0.15  ($257.10).   We
note that the applicant was paid for 626 miles related  to  his  DITY
move from SJAFB to New York.   If  he  was  granted  payment  for  an
additional  1714  miles,  it  would  exceed  the  combined  total  of
traveling from SJAFB to New York  and  then  to  the  Academy  (2,310
miles).  The applicant is seeking payment for 5  days  of  per  diem,
although he was previously paid for 4 ($344.00) based on the date his
travel voucher indicated he departed New York (30 Jul 04) and arrived
at the Academy (2 Aug 04).  Although he was authorized  5  days,  per
diem is based on the actual days used.  An additional  5  days  would
bring the total number of days per diem to 9, which would exceed  the
total number of days he would have been authorized  if  the  combined
mileage total of 2,310 had been  used.   We  also  do  not  find  the
evidence sufficient to support payment for an additional  DITY  move.
Therefore, we recommend  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 competent  authority
authorized a nontaxable payment of  $82.15  for  reimbursable  travel
expenses in conjunction with his relocation to the United States  Air
Force Academy under Special Order A-775, dated 8 Jul 04.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number  BC-2005-
02292 in Executive Session on 19 October 2005, under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member
      Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Jul 05, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Memorandum, HQ AF/DPDFP, dated 6 Sep 05.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Sep 05.
     Exhibit E.  Memorandum, JPPSO-SAT/ECAF, dated 13 Sep 05.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Sep 05.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 21 Sep 05, w/atch.
     Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 11 Oct 05.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair


AFBCMR BC-2005-02292


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  competent
authority authorized a nontaxable payment of  $82.15  for  reimbursable
travel expenses in conjunction with his relocation to the United States
Air Force Academy under Special Order A-775, dated 8 Jul 04.






            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency