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.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He moved his family and HHG, at his own expense, from  the  Las  Vegas,  NV,
area to Abilene, TX, on 11 August 2005, in anticipation of his Palace  Chase
application being approved and his being hired by  the  Texas  Air  National
Guard (TXANG) as the  Detachment  Commander  of  the  TXANG  Predator  Unit,
reporting approximately 90 days later.

The TXANG wanted him in place on 1 October 2005 so he  could  get  the  unit
set up and ready to meet its obligations since its Initial  Unit  Capability
(IOC) was programmed for June 2006.  This was a high priority assignment  as
it was tied into BRAC and the loss of the F-16 unit stationed  at  Ellington
Field, TX.  Additionally, the high  demand  for  Predators  in  the  War  on
Terrorism added another level of urgency  in  getting  this  unit  stood  up
quickly and getting more Predators in the air.

At the time he moved his dependents and HHG, he was  unaware  of  the  Joint
Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR) requirements.  His children  were  entering
the 12th, 11th, 9th, and 5th grades, he and his wife did not  want  to  move
during the middle of their eldest son’s senior  year  in  high  school,  and
they wanted their children to do their best in  school  without  having  the
added stress of leaving one school in the middle of the year and going to  a
new one.

Sometime in December 2005, the budgeting for all  ANG  Predator  units  fell
through.  Prior to this, all the information he had received indicated  this
was a high priority mission, the budgeting would come through, and  for  him
to continue making plans for standing up his new unit.   Since  there  would
now be no budget until FY07 minimum, there was a reorganization of  the  IOC
dates and  the  TXANG  IOC  date  was  pushed  beyond  September  2007,  and
continues to slip.  Since his assignment at the time was a three year  tour,
he subsequently received PCS orders returning him to  Dyess  AFB  (Abilene),
TX.

He has been the victim of an  injustice  in  that  if  things  had  gone  as
planned, the Air Force would have generated  a  separation  order,  Abilene,
TX, would become his home of record, and he would  have  moved  to  Abilene,
TX, within 90 days of his family moving there.  He is not  asking  for  more
than what would have been authorized him under the order  that  subsequently
moved him to Dyess AFB, TX.  He had approximately 14,000 pounds of  HHG,  he
has been paid for the 1,800 pounds that he moved from his apartment  in  Las
Vegas, and is asking for payment for the other 12,200 pounds of  items  that
he previously moved to Abilene, TX.

In support of his appeal, he submits a personal statement, memorandums  from
JFTX-AC-CC, dated  17  August  2005,  the  15th Reconnaissance  Squadron/CC,
dated 8 September 2005, the 57th Operations Group/CC, dated 7 October  2005,
the Dyess AFB Traffic Management Office, dated 21  November  2006,  and  the
7th Logistics Readiness Squadron Quality Assurance Inspector, undated, an e-
mail from the 57th Wing Commander,  dated  19 October  2005,  and  a  packet
containing miscellaneous finance records concerning his PCS  move  to  Dyess
AFB, TX.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The AF is governed in matters pertaining to the  shipment  of  HHG  for  its
military members by Volume 1, Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR),  which
is promulgated from Title 37, U.S. Code.  Paragraph  U5330-G,  JFTR,  states
that movement of HHG before PCS orders are issued may be authorized  if  the
request for transportation is supported by a statement from the PCS  orders-
issuing official, or  a  designated  representative,  that  the  member  was
advised before such orders were issued that they would  be  issued,  if  the
member signs a written agreement to pay any additional  costs  incurred  for
transportation required to another point  because  the  new  permanent  duty
station named in the orders is different than that named in  the  statement,
and if the member signs a written  agreement  to  pay  the  entire  cost  of
transportation  if  orders  are  not   later   issued   to   authorize   the
transportation.  These provisions also state that  the  length  of  time  in
which a member may be advised that orders will be issued is  the  relatively
short time between when a determination is made  to  issue  the  orders  and
when the orders are actually issued.  General information that is  furnished
a member such as the date of release from active duty may not be  considered
advice that orders will be issued.

When applicant moved his dependents and HHG from Las Vegas, NV, to  Abilene,
TX, in August 2005, he did not have PCS orders and had not  been  officially
selected or  notified  of  an  impending  reassignment.   He  relocated  his
dependents in anticipation of applying for early release  from  active  duty
under the Palace Chase program.

Applicants commander at the time signed  his  Palace  Chase  application  in
September 2005, and certified that there were no  quality  force  indicators
that might impact the action; however, he and  the  Group  Commander  voiced
concern to the then Wing Commander that his unit was only  66%  manned  and,
since applicant’s tour was not up until October 2006, they were  willing  to
release him in April 2006.  Applicant was not reassigned (to Dyess AFB,  TX)
until October 2006, more than one year after he relocated his dependents.

Applicant does not have the certified weight tickets which are  required  to
determine the authorized reimbursements for an authorized  movement  of  HHG
at personal expense.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

JPPSO-SAT/ECAF recommends denial as applicant relocated his  dependents  and
moved his HHG prior to the Palace Chase  package  being  submitted/reviewed.
They state  it  is  abundantly  clear  the  dependents  were  relocated  for
personal reasons and not because of an impending reassignment as he did  not
have PCS orders nor had he been advised that such orders  would  be  issued.
In similar cases, they advise  the  Comptroller  General  of  the  U.S.  has
consistently held that members who relocate dependents or move HHG prior  to
the issuance of PCS orders are not entitled to reimbursement.

Additionally, members who  are  authorized  reimbursement  for  movement  of
their HHG at personal  expense  must  provide  certified  weight  checks  to
support the reimbursement, as the Government’s cost limit is  based  on  the
amount of weight  moved  or  the  member’s  maximum  HHG  weight  allowance,
whichever is less.  Since  applicant  doesn’t  have  valid  weight  tickets,
there is no method  to  determine  the  authorized  reimbursement,  and  the
statement provided by applicant concerning the estimated weight of  his  HHG
is not sufficient to obligate the Government’s disbursement of funds.

The JPPSO-SAT/ECAF evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded to the  JPPSO-SAT/ECAF  evaluation  on  3 January  2007,
stating that some of their responses are  not  entirely  correct.   He  took
issue with the statement “he did  not  have  PCS  orders  nor  had  he  been
selected or notified of an impending reassignment”, stating that  the  TXANG
notified him on 4 August 2005 that they intended to  hire  him,  and  on  17
August 2005, the TXANG/CC wrote a letter stating that he needed him  in  the
TXANG effective 1 October 2005.  He states that although he  cannot  support
this with any e-mails, the 57th WG/CC verbally informed him  that  he  would
work with the TXANG to meet their requirements without  adversely  affecting
the mission of the 57th WG.  He also points out that in the  e-mail  traffic
in his application, the 57th WG/CC says he decided  to  support  his  Palace
Chase package, and, although the e-mail is in October 2005, the  57th  WG/CC
told him this verbally in August 2005.

He  also  stated  that  due  to  the  manning  situation   in   his   losing
organization, he didn’t expect to be in place by 1 October 2005; rather,  he
thought an understanding would be reached between the TXANG and  his  losing
organization and that he would be released around 1 December 2005.

He also took issue with the statement that he relocated his  dependents  for
personal reasons rather than an impending assignment.  He states  that  upon
his return from an AEF rotation in early August  2005  and  notification  of
his selection, he moved his family during his R&R period  as  his  commander
would not approve leave later in the month  to  accomplish  this  feat.   He
reiterated his desire to have his children begin school at the beginning  of
the school year rather than during the middle, and furnished a copy  of  his
Palace Chase form which was approved by the 57th WG/CC on  22  October  2005
for a requested  effective  date  of  1  December  2005,  changed  from  his
original request of 1 October 2005.

Applicant closed by stating  he  felt  the  overall  tone  of  the  advisory
conveyed an attitude that he was trying to defraud the Air  Force  and  that
he moved his family  with  no  orders  or  expectation  of  receiving  those
orders.  He states that every indication he was given was that  orders  were
on the way, his commanders were saying the same thing, and  it  was  just  a
matter of filling out the paperwork.  He again  pointed  out  that  the  Air
Force moved him to Dyess AFB, TX, one year later and, had he not  moved  his
family earlier, the Air Force would have been required to pay  to  move  his
family to the exact place they now reside.  He closed  by  stating  that  he
moved his family when he did in  good  faith  that  he  would  be  receiving
orders around 1 October 2005, and  is  in  no  way  trying  to  defraud  the
Government.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachment, 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.   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 its rationale as the basis for our conclusion  that
the  applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error   or   injustice.
Applicant’s  dependents  were  relocated  well  before  his   Palace   Chase
application had been formally approved, and despite  the  fact  he  did  not
have PCS orders and had not been formally advised that such orders would  be
issued.   In  similar  cases,  the  Comptroller  General  of  the  U.S.  has
consistently held that members who relocate dependents or move HHG prior  to
the issuance of PCS orders are not entitled  to  reimbursement.   Therefore,
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

________________________________________________________________

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  Docket  Number  BC-2006-03660
in Executive Session on 6 February 2007, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. James W. Russell, III, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
                       Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Nov 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, JPPSO-SAT/ECAF, dated 15 Dec 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 3 Jan 07, w/atch
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated. 22 Dec 06




                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL, III
                                   Panel Chair