Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02486
Original file (BC-2005-02486.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02486
                                        INDEX CODE:  128.02
  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                       COUNSEL:  NONE

  XXXXXXXXX                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  13 February 2007


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be authorized an extension to store household goods (HHG)  at  Government
expense from April 2002 to the present.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was misled to  believe  he  could  get  extensions  for  HHG  storage  at
government expense up to five years for medical reasons.

In  support  of  his  application,  the  applicant  submits  copies  of  his
retirement order, Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) Rating Decision,  DVA
clinic letters, U.S. Postal Service “High Risk” letter, and  a  letter  from
the Joint Personal Property Shipping  Office  (JPPSO)  concerning  extension
entitlement.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments,  is  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The  applicant  was  relieved   from   active   duty   with   an   honorable
characterization of service on 30 April 2001 and, retired  effective  1  May
2001.  He retired in the rank of master sergeant with 20 years, and 16  days
of active duty.

According to a DVA letter dated 15 March 2004,  the  applicant  was  granted
service connected disability rated at 70 percent.

On 18 April 2005, JPPSO denied the applicant’s  request  for  a  travel  and
transportation extension.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

   JPPSO-SAT/ECAF recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  ECAF states
   in accordance with paragraph U5365-D,  Joint  Federal  Travel  Regulation
   (JFTR), an extension of time limit may be authorized or approved  through
   the Secretarial process for members who are confined  in,  or  undergoing
   treatment at a hospital on the date of termination of active duty, or for
   any period during the 1-year following termination of  active  duty.   An
   extension of the time limit would apply only for the amount of  time  the
   member was confined in a medical facility  or  deemed  to  be  unable  to
   travel due to medical reasons that occurred during the first year.  There
   are no provisions in the (JFTR) to extend the time limit  for  travel  or
   storage entitlements for members after they relocate.


   ECAF states the applicant was released from active duty on 30 April  2001
   establishing his expiration for transportation entitlements as  30  April
   2002.  He was not confined in a medical facility  nor  deemed  unable  to
   travel due to  medical  reasons  after  his  release  from  active  duty.
   Indeed, after retirement, the applicant relocated from North Carolina  to
   Fort Lauderdale, Florida.  It is JPPSO’s opinion the  applicant  did  not
   meet the criteria for extension of his transportation entitlements.   The
   AF/DPPC 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  30
September 2005 for review and comment within 30  days.   As  of  this  date,
this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest  of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice.   The  applicant  asserts  he  was
misled to believe he could get extensions for his HHG storage at  government
expense up to five  years  for  medical  reasons;  however,  he  provide  no
evidence to support this contention.  We note in accordance with  the  JFTR,
an extension of time  limit  may  be  authorized  or  approved  through  the
Secretarial  process  for  members  who  are  confined  in,  or   undergoing
treatment at a hospital on the date of termination of active  duty,  or  for
any period during the 1-year  following  termination  of  active  duty.   An
extension of the time limit would apply only for  the  amount  of  time  the
member was confined in a medical facility or deemed to be unable  to  travel
due to medical reasons that occurred during the first  year.   However,  the
applicant has not provided evidence to show he was  confined  to  a  medical
facility or unable to travel due to medical reasons.   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 the applicant has not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.
Accordingly, we find no no  basis  upon  which  to  favorably  consider  the
applicant’s request.

_________________________________________________________________

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 application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 21 February 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Patrick C. Daugherty, Member
                 Ms. Glenda H. Scheiner, Member

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2005-02486
was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Forms 149, dated 5 Aug 05, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, JPPSO-SAT/ECAF, dated 19 Sep 05.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Sep 05.




                                  RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                  Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02941

    Original file (BC-2005-02941.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Prior to expiration of her travel and transportation entitlements on 31 Jul 01, she requested an extension of the time limit for educational reasons. Since 31 Jul 01, the applicant’s travel and transportation entitlements have been extended in one-year increments as a member undergoing education or training, and she has been informed the approval did not extend her NTS entitlement beyond 31 Jul 01. She was also informed this was the final extension she would be granted, as there was no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02012

    Original file (BC-2004-02012.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Per JFTR paragraph U5012-I, a written time extension that includes an explanation of circumstances justifying the extension may: 1) be authorized/approved for a specific additional time period using the Secretarial Process; 2) be authorized or approved only when circumstances prevent use within the prescribed time, and must be for the shortest time appropriate under the circumstances; 3) not be granted merely to accommodate personal preferences or conveniences (DoD/CG #99-1); and 4) not be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01917

    Original file (BC-2005-01917.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, and extension may not be authorized/approved if it extends travel and transpiration allowances for more than 6 years from the date of separation or release from active duty or retirement unless a certified on-going medical condition prevents relocation of the member for longer than 6 years from the separation/retirement date. After carefully reviewing the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, it is our opinion the applicant should be entitled to transportation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00637

    Original file (BC-2006-00637.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00637 INDEX CODE: 128.00 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to repay all charges associated with the nontemporary storage (NTS) and have his shipping entitlements reinstated so he can reship his household goods (HHG) at government expense. Therefore, we agree with the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02343

    Original file (BC-2006-02343.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02343 INDEX CODE: 128.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 6 FEB 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His transportation entitlements be reinstated to allow a final move and shipment of his household goods (HHG). He completed 20 years of active service for retirement. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02814

    Original file (BC-2005-02814.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-03447

    Original file (BC-2006-03447.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She completed 20 years and 19 days of active service for retirement. Under the provisions of paragraph U5012-I, JFTR, a written time limit extension that includes an explanation of the circumstances justifying the extension may be authorized/approved for a specific additional time period using the Secretarial Process only when circumstances prevented use within the prescribed time; must be for the shortest time appropriate under the circumstances; not be granted merely to accommodate...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00633

    Original file (BC-2006-00633.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02292

    Original file (BC-2005-02292.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY1999 | 9802672

    Original file (9802672.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    It appears that in each instance that the applicant requested an extension for non-temporary storage (NTS) of his household goods (HHG), he was informed that the request for extension was approved; however, he was not advised there would be a cost to him commencing one year after termination of active duty. However, JPPSO/DIR states that they would support storage entitlement to 6 October 1997, the time he was informed of the debt and the applicant would be responsible for storage costs in...