Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04091
Original file (BC-2010-04091.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY 
RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04091 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

He be reimbursed for Early Return of Dependents (ERD) travel and 
transportation entitlements from his overseas assignment at 
Kadena AB, Japan. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was approved for ERD for his dependents in May 2008, but when 
he found out that it was approved, he was notified of a pending 
assignment. He was counseled by his assignment counselor that 
his permanent change of station (PCS) orders would be written to 
include the entitlements that an ERD order would have provided. 
He was told he would be able to claim all entitlements once he 
arrived at his follow-on assignment. He has since found out 
that he could have had an ERD order published and that his PCS 
orders will not cover his dependents as he had previously been 
counseled. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant submits copies of 
statements from his commander and superintendent, and AF Form 
899, Request and Authorization for Permanent Change of Station - 
Military. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in 
the grade of technical sergeant. 

 

On 17 June 2008, the applicant received unaccompanied PCS orders 
to Incirlik, Turkey. The applicant’s PCS orders state “Member 
has an approved follow on assignment but has elected not to 
claim dislocation allowance (DLA). Member has also agreed to 
relocate dependent(s), ship HHGs and/or store HHGs at own 
expense to Oakland, CA.” 

 

_______________________________________________________________ 


AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPAPP recommends denied. DPAPP states the applicant 
elected an unaccompanied tour to Turkey and received an approved 
follow-on assignment to Hawaii. The applicant was not eligible 
for an ERD because he was notified of an assignment prior to 
their travel. The applicant states he applied to return his 
family early from Kadena in accordance with (IAW) the ERD 
program and it was approved on or about 1 June 2008. However, 
the Military Personnel Flight (MPF) informed him his ERD was no 
longer valid because he had an assignment to Turkey. In this 
case, the applicant was notified of his assignment to Turkey 
before his dependents began their travel; therefore, his 
dependents could travel on his PCS orders. His PCS orders were 
published on 17 June 2008 and his family departed Kadena on 
2 July 2008. The applicant’s orders reflected that he would 
relocate his dependents and ship/store HHG at his own expense in 
order to retain his follow-on assignment. 

 

DPAPP states IAW AFI 36-2110, Assignments, the purpose of the 
follow-on assignment is to reduce PCS costs and increase family 
stability. In order to be considered for a follow-on 
assignment, an airman agrees, up front, that they will not 
relocate their dependents or ship/store HHGs, at government 
expense, to any location other than the follow-on location. The 
applicant’s order reflected he would relocate his dependents and 
ship/store HHGs at his own expense in order to retain his 
follow-on assignment. 

 

The complete DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 19 November 2010, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 
days. As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office (Exhibit C). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 an 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 the 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 


and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the 
applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the 
existence of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-04091 in Executive Session on 21 July 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Oct 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 10 Nov 10. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Nov 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03817

    Original file (BC-2003-03817.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, if the member requests cancellation of his follow- on assignment, he will then be authorized reimbursement for the DITTY move. If he elects this option, the MPF will request cancellation of his follow-on assignment through this office and his orders will be amended accordingly. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01672

    Original file (BC-2006-01672.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to documents provided by the applicant, per Special Order dated 3 Aug 04, he was assigned to Korea with a report not later than date of 15 Aug 04. At the time the applicant’s orders were published on 3 Aug 04, his dependents were already located in Belgium and at the time of his departure for his assignment in Korea, the applicant had failed to apply for a follow-on assignment. In addition to the information provided at Exhibit C, they note that the applicant was authorized...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060017537C071113

    Original file (20060017537C071113.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant was instructed by Aviation Branch, HRC-Alexandria, that he would be authorized to move his dependents and HHG to his HOR during his deployment and that he would receive BAH for the HOR location. There is no evidence the applicant ever contacted the Transportation Office at Fort Huachuca or Fort Hood. When ordered on a PCS, the member is only allowed to move his dependents at Government expense to the new PCS location.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000170

    Original file (20070000170.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states, in effect, that he was given orders to PCS to Fort Hood with a report date of 15 September 2006, and a deployment date of 23 October 2006. Given the applicant moved his family members in good faith based on the information contained in his PCS orders, this DA official recommends the Army Board of Corrections to Military Records (ABCMR) grant authorization to the applicant for the following: movement of dependents at Government expense (including authority for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00894

    Original file (BC-2010-00894.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00894 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His entitlement to ship his non-temporary storage (NTS) from Arkansas to Germany be reinstated. Applicant is now in receipt of Special Order AD-013221, dated 8 November 2009, authorizing separation from the Air Force effective 24 June 2010, with...

  • 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. ...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006506

    Original file (20080006506.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The letter to the Senator's office further reads that the applicant's orders erroneously authorized the transportation of HHG to an HOS instead of his HOR or place of entry on active duty and that the transportation office incorrectly advised the applicant that the time limit was 1 year. The Senator's office was informed by the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-4, that if requested by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, they will support the applicant's request for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900445

    Original file (9900445.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of the appeal, applicant submits AF Form 899, Request and Authorization for Permanent Change of Station - Military; Request and Authorization for Change of Administrative Orders; Application for Shipment and/or Storage of Personal Property; letter, ECAF- B, dated 23 May 96; Government Bill of Lading; Pay Adjustment Authorization; Applicant’s letter, dated 19 Dec 98; and letter, ECAF, dated 9 Feb 99. The Board notes that at the time of his PCS, the applicant was an E-3, had...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011490

    Original file (20140011490.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests, in effect, payment for a personally procured move (PPM), formerly known as a do-it-yourself (DITY) move, he made from Fort Campbell, Kentucky to Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado. Travel reimbursement is not authorized when the travel is performed before receipt of written or oral orders.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01947

    Original file (BC-2006-01947.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    DD Form 2278, Application for DITY Move and Counseling Checklist, dated 9 Dec 05, indicates the applicant advised the transportation office at Pope AFB he had an estimated weight of 500 pounds to ship to Eielson AFB, AK. Since transportation personnel are without authority to authorize a member to ship more weight than what is authorized by regulations, it is doubtful they would advise the applicant he could transport the excess weight himself and be reimbursed for doing so. We noted the...