Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00665
Original file (BC-2006-00665.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-00665
            INDEX CODE:  100.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  4 SEP 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be granted an extension of his transportation  entitlements  so  that  he
may relocate from California to Atlanta, Georgia at Government expense.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Upon out-processing, he could not find a suitable  job  in  Georgia,  so  he
decided to stay in California.  In 2003, he started a  business  with  hopes
of  building  it  to  a  level  that   could   facilitate   a   move   home.
Unfortunately, it took longer than expected.  His original  eligibility  for
extension ended in 2004 and had he chosen to use the final permanent  change
of station (PCS) within the allotted extension period, he  would  have  been
in a very precarious position.

In support of  his  request,  the  applicant  provided  a  copy  of  a  pre-
incorporation subscription  agreement  and  an  AF  Form  100,  Request  and
Authorization for Separation.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 May 2001, the applicant was released from active duty in the  grade  of
captain effective and with a date of rank of 29 May 2000.  At  the  time  of
his release he was assigned to HQ Space and Missile Systems  Center  in  Los
Angeles, California.  His entitlement  to  relocate  at  Government  expense
terminated on 30 October 2001.

_________________________________________________________________


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

JPPSO-SAT/ECAF recommends denial.  JPPSO  states  entitlement  to  household
good (HHG) transportation terminates on the 181st day  following  separation
from the service or relief from active duty  unless  a  written  application
for HHG transportation is  turned  in  to  a  transportation  officer  or  a
designated representative  before  the  expiration  of  the  180th  day.   A
written time limit extension may  be  authorized,  but  it  is  not  granted
merely to accommodate personal  preferences  or  convenience.   He  did  not
state how he is the victim of an error or injustice, nor did he provide  any
reasoning for not relocating within  the  prescribed  time  limit  that  was
beyond his control.

The JPPSO complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 30 June 2006, the evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  for  review
and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  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 an error or injustice.  Evidence has not been  presented  which
would lead us to believe that the regulations in effect  at  the  time  were
not appropriately applied or that he was treated differently than others  in
similar  situations.   Accordingly,  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.  In the  absence  of  evidence  to
the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting  the  relief
sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or an injustice; the application was denied without  a
personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2006-
00665 in Executive Session on 8 August 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                 Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                 Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
                 Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 February 2006, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, JPPSO-SAT/ECAF, dated 20 June 2006.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 June 2006.



                 CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                 Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2004 | BC-2004-02069

    Original file (BC-2004-02069.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She was not able to use her HHG shipping entitlement during the allotted time and requested an extension. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, 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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02486

    Original file (BC-2005-02486.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force...

  • 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 | 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-2006-00123

    Original file (BC-2006-00123.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, a member's HHG transportation entitlements are based on the amount of weight moved within the authorized weight allowance for his/her grade. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the Joint Personal Property Shipping office's determination that since the applicant elected to move his household goods eight months after his shipment entitlement expired and has provided no evidence to show he meets the...

  • 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 | CY2007 | BC-2006-03660

    Original file (BC-2006-03660.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03660 INDEX CODE: 128.14 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 2 JUNE 2008 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reimbursed for moving his dependents and household goods (HHG) more than a year before he was issued Permanent Change of Station (PCS) orders. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03655

    Original file (BC-2005-03655.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ECAF states the applicant retired from active duty on 31 January 1992, and the reason he did not relocate within the one year following termination of active duty was not due to an unexpected event beyond his control, but due to his decision to obtain employment in the local area of his last duty station. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 16 Dec...

  • 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...