Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02814
Original file (BC-2005-02814.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02814
                                        INDEX CODE:  128.02
  XXXXXXXXXXXXX                   COUNSEL:  NONE

  XXXXXXXXXX                            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  17 March 2007


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Household Goods (HHG) be  placed  in  long-term  storage  in  Lancaster,
California or delivered to his current address in Lake Stevens,  Washington.


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was under the impression his HHG  was  placed  in  long-term  storage  in
North Carolina.

In support of his application, the applicant submits a personal  memorandum;
and, copies of application for shipment and/or storage of personal  property
and  his  discharge  order.   The  applicant’s  complete  submission,   with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to his military personnel records the applicant was relieved  from
active duty on 31 July 2005 and retired effective 1 August 2005.  He  served
26 years and 1 day of active duty.

On 21 April 2005, the applicant signed  a  DD  Form  1299,  Application  for
Shipment and/or Storage of Personal Property,  indicating  shipment  of  his
HHG from Goldsboro, NC to Lancaster, CA.  His shipment of  HHG  moved  under
Government Bill of Lading (GBL)  ZY-415950  with  a  net  weight  of  10,640
pounds and arrived at destination on 27 June 2005.  His HHG  was  placed  in
storage-in-transit (SIT) for 90  days.   On  18  August  2005,  the  traffic
management office at Edwards AFB, CA received  a  DD  Form  1857,  Temporary
Commercial Storage at Government  Expense,  from  the  applicant  requesting
extension of the storage as  he  did  not  have  a  delivery  address.   The
storage was extended until 23 December 2005.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

JPPSO-SAT/ECAF recommends denial of the applicant’s  request.   ECAF  states
in accordance  with  paragraph  U5365-C,  Joint  Federal  Travel  Regulation
(JFTR), a retired member who is entitled to HHG transportation, is  entitled
to nontemporary storage (NTS).  The  entitlement  begins  on  the  date  the
orders are issued and terminates one year from the date  of  termination  of
active duty.  NTS is authorized at the point where the HHG are located  when
the orders are issued.  The HHG may not be transported to some  other  place
and placed in long-term storage.  Reshipment  of  the  same  HHG  under  one
entitlement is prohibited.  In accordance with paragraph  U5318,  JFTR,  HHG
transportation shall not be made for a member’s convenience  to  some  other
place for re-transportation later.

It is ECAF’s opinion that documentation clearly  indicates  the  applicant’s
intention to ship his HHG to Lancaster, CA.  The  HHG  counselor  could  not
have selected Lancaster, CA, as the destination to ship the applicant’s  HHG
without input from him.   The  ECAF  evaluation,  with  attachments,  is  at
Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  15
October 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice.  The  applicant  contends  he  was
under the impression his HHG was in long-term storage in North Carolina  and
now wishes his HHG be shipped to Lake Stevens,  WA  at  government  expense.
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.   We  note  in
accordance with the JFTR, reshipment of the same HHG under  one  entitlement
is prohibited.  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.  In view of the above, we find 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 23 February 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
                 Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2005-02814
was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Forms 149, dated 6 Sep 05, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, JPPSO-SAT/ECAF, dated 30 Sep 05.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Oct 05.




                                   LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY1998 | 9600580

    Original file (9600580.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thus, once the applicant's HHG shipment departed Germany, there was no opportunity to divert the shipment until it arrived at the port of Long Beach. VP-119,872 with a net weight of 13,364 pound was charged a total of $969.00 for excess di ore of Abilene TX Loma Linda CA vice the authorized destination he ade c. After arriving in'the US,-traveled to Tulsa OK. On 1 June 1994, he visited the Traffic Management Office (TMO) at Dyess AFB TX and requested the HHG shipment that was en route to...

  • 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 | CY1998 | 9800610

    Original file (9800610.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00610 t-tkil 51999 HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The additional "Excess Cost" of $334.11 she was assessed for shipping her Household Goods (HHG) to Wichita, KS, vice Kansas City, MO, be eliminated. Therefore, regardless of the shipment weight, the applicant would have still incurred excess cost charges to ship the property to the alternate destination. JPPSO-DTR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02165

    Original file (BC-2007-02165.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states the TMO's responsibility was to counsel him on his entitlement to have his HHG stored at government expense for one year at the place of origin. The DD Form 1299, Application for Shipment and/or Storage of Personal Property, is not designed to be used for counseling and contains no information or references to shipping entitlements for disabled service members...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00425

    Original file (BC-2005-00425.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02335

    Original file (BC-2003-02335.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03808

    Original file (BC-2005-03808.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was counseled that he is entitled to one year of storage following his retirement from the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05924

    Original file (BC 2012 05924.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...