RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01992
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be compensated for his Personally Procured Move (PPM) as
briefed to him by the Hickam Transportation Management Office
(TMO).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The TMO office incorrectly used low cost rates to counsel him
on his PPM application rather than the newly implemented best
value rates. As such, the counselor incorrectly estimated the
amount of compensation he would receive for a Do-it-Yourself
(DITY) move. Had he been briefed correctly, he would not have
agreed to a PPM that provided no incentive and resulted in
excess costs.
In support of his appeal, the applicant a letter from the
Commander, and other forms associated with his move.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is in the Regular Air Force serving in the rank of
lieutenant colonel.
On 9 June 2010, pursuant to permanent change of station orders
from Hickam AFB, HI to Minot AFB, ND, a TMO counselor briefed
the applicant that he would receive an Estimated Gross
Incentive of $22,556.80 to personally procure his move. Based
on that amount, the applicant was given an advance payment of
$14,246.40.
On 16 November 2010, Minots TMO computed the applicants actual
costs as $15,300.00, but his entitlement was $14,535.00. Since
the applicant received an advance of $14,246.40, he incurred a
debt of $722.47. On 5 January 2011, the Air Force remitted that
debt.
Effective 1 April 2010, change 283, to the JFTR, requires that
Government Constructed Costs (GCC) be used to determine the
incentive payments in PPM be based on best value versus the
low cots charges.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
PPA HQ/ECAF recommends denial. The JFTR requires the members
incentive be based on 95 percent of the GCC, and at the time of
the applicants shipment, the GCC was based on best value
rates. The applicants total moving expenses totaled
$10,490.71. Although, he did not receive as much incentive as
he was initially advised, he did not lose any money on the PPM.
The applicant applied for and was approved for remission of the
debt established for the excess advance payment he received in
the amount of 722.47.
The complete ECAF evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant respectfully disagrees with the Air Force
advisorys statement it is unfortunate the applicant did not
receive as much as he was initially advised, he did not lose any
money on this PPM. The $10,490.71 does not compensate him and
his wife for the 250 man-hours of labor they performed. Nor
does it account for his leave, time off work and the risk
incurred incident to the move. If the TMO office at Hickam had
correctly advised him, he would have concluded that would not be
adequate compensation for the work needed. He would not have
elected to perform a PPM.
The applicants complete response 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 an error or injustice. Although it
does appear the applicant was miscounseled regarding the amount
of reimbursement he could expect to receive for a Personally
Procured Move, he was fully compensated for his move and in
reality received a de facto incentive through remission of the
debt incurred for the excess advance initially received. As
such, we believe he has received full and fitting relief.
Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of PPA
HQ/ECAF and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice
warranting further action by this Board. 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-2011-01992 in Executive Session on 12 March 2012,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Vice Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 May 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, PPA HQ/ECAF, dated 13 Oct 11.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicants Response, dated 23 Nov 11.
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01260
She would not have done a DITY move had she known the correct rate provided no incentive and resulted in extra costs. Effective 1 April 2010, change 283 to the JFTR requires that Government Constructed Costs (GCC) used to determine the incentive payments in PPM be based on best value versus the low cost charges. Although it does appear the applicant was miscounseled regarding the amount of reimbursement she could expect to receive for a Personally Procured Move, she was fully...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01334
She would not have done a DITY move had she known the correct rate provided no incentive and resulted in extra costs. Effective 1 April 2010, change 283 to the JFTR requires that Government Constructed Costs (GCC) used to determine the incentive payments in PPM be based on best value versus the low cost charges. Although it does appear the applicant was miscounseled regarding the amount of reimbursement she could expect to receive for a Personally Procured Move, she was fully...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02483
He would not have done a DITY move had he known the correct rate provided no incentive and resulted in extra costs. On 2 Apr 12, PPA HQ ECAF amended paragraph 6 of their original Air Force evaluation to read should the Board choose to provide the applicant the relief he is seeking, recommend the records be changed to reflect that under competent authority, the PPM was processed on 1 Apr 10 resulting in the utilization of low cost rates under the Transportation Operational Personal...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01423
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded by stating that he did not receive the briefing regarding the change in the JFTR until 25 Jun 10, two full months after the change. The TMO agreed to allow him to cancel the PPM. Although it does appear the applicant was miscounseled regarding the amount of reimbursement he could expect to receive for a Personally Procured Move, he was fully compensated for...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01577
ECAF states the JFTR requires that a members incentive be based upon 95 percent of the GCC, and at the time of the applicants shipment, the GCC was based upon the best value rates reflected in the DPS. To date, a response has not been received (Exhibit C). Although it does appear the applicant was miscounseled regarding the amount of reimbursement he could expect to receive for a PPM, he was fully compensated for his move and in reality received a de facto incentive through remission...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01499
The applicant completed a DD Form 2278, Application for Do-it-Yourself Move and Counseling Checklist, and was quoted an estimated incentive payment of $19,524.78 to personally procure his move. Based on that amount, the applicant was given an advance payment of $12,331.44. ECAF recommends the applicant be reimbursed for any funds personally expended in excess of the authorized GCC.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03079
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03079 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be compensated for his personally procured move (PPM) as briefed to him by the Hickam Traffic Management Office (TMO), or in the alternative cover the actual cost of the PPM. He was only compensated $8,370.24, which did not cover the total move...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02765
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02765 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive compensation for his personally procured move (PPM) from Hawaii to Texas that he was quoted using rates calculated under the Transportation Operational Personal Property Standard (TOPS) system rather than those authorized by the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02715
The applicant completed a DD Form 2278, Application for Do-It-Yourself Move and Counseling Checklist, and was quoted an estimated incentive payment of $17,689.20 to personally procure his move. Based on that amount, the applicant was given an advance payment of $10,613.52. To date, a response has not been received (Exhibit C).
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01032
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01032 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be compensated for his Personally Procured Move (PPM) as briefed to him by the Hickam Transportation Management Office (TMO). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The TMO office incorrectly...