IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	       28 JULY 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090003052 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that she be paid for a personally procured move (PPM), also known as a do-it-yourself (DITY) move, of her household goods (HHG) shipment from Fort Riley, Kansas to her home of selection (HOS) in Milan, Illinois. 

2.  The applicant states that she should have been allowed the ability to move her HHG by DITY move because she was diagnosed with fibromyalgia and rheumatoid arthritis.  She states that she was found to be disabled when she was at Fort Riley, Kansas.  She states that she has no feelings in her hands or legs and that her husband came home in July to move 5300 pounds of items to her home so she would have her “things.”

3.  The applicant provides the documents that she forwarded to Fort Riley, Kansas, for payment, which consist of a Statement of Claim; a List of Property and Claims Analysis Chart; a copy of Orders 228-0001 dated 15 August 2008; electronic mail between Army officials and herself; a copy of an Account Holder Transaction; a copy and the original Uniform HHG Bill of Lading and Freight Bill; a copy of her guarantee; a copy of her receipt of payment to budget Van Lines/Dona Moving Company; a self-authored letter dated 5 September 2008, addressed to “Dear Ma’am or Sir”; a letter from a Senator’s office dated             10 February 2009, responding to her request for request for information from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA); a copy of a letter from a Member of 



Congress dated 9 February 2009, responding to her request for information from the United States Army Personnel Operations Branch at Fort Riley, Kansas; a copy of her Medical Evaluation Board diagnosis and recommendation; and a Memorandum for Record dated 13 August 2008.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant provides a HHG Bill of Lading that shows she contracted with Budget Van Lines/Dona Moving Company to have her HHG moved from Fort Riley, Kansas to Milan, Illinois, with a scheduled pickup date of 9 July 2008.  The cost of this move was $1,951.00.

2.  The available records indicate that the applicant was on active duty in the RA when Orders 228-0001, dated 15 August 2008, were published releasing the applicant from assignment and duty at Fort Riley, Kansas, effective 26 August 2008, due to physical disability incurred while entitled to basic pay and placing her on the Temporary Disability Retired List.  The orders state that she was authorized up to 1 year to ship her HHG to a HOS.

3.  During the processing of the case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Compensation and Entitlement Division, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff G-4, who recommend special authorization be granted to reissue the applicant's temporary disability retirement orders (Orders 228-0001) with an issue date of    1 July 2008.  The Chief, Compensation and Entitlements Division stated that the applicant conducted her DITY move on 8 July 2008 and her move was conducted per the advice of senior noncommissioned officers in her NCO support chain, but prior to the issuance of her retirement orders on 15 August 2008.  The Chief, Compensation and Entitlements Division further stated that had the Army issued the applicant’s retirement orders in a timelier manner, authority for reimbursing her for her DITY expenses would have been available; that it is prudent to allow the applicant to be reimbursed because the Army’s intent was to allow her a HOS move at Government expense; and that changing the issue date of her orders to 1 July 2008 will allow the Army’s intent.  The Chief, Compensation and Entitlements Division concluded by stating that the funding to pay for the applicant move is contained in Orders 228-0001.

4.  A copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant on 7 May 2009 for her concurrence and/or possible rebuttal.  The applicant concurred with the advisory opinion on 13 May 2009.




5.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 55-2 (It's Your Move) provides, in pertinent part, guidance on PPMs.  It states that the PPM program is an alternate means of moving personal property.  The program allows a service member to personally move HHG and either be reimbursed up to the Government's cost or to collect an incentive payment from the government when they have orders for a permanent change of station, temporary duty, separation, retirement, or assignment to/from or between Government quarters.  Whether a privately owned vehicle/trailer, rental truck/trailer, a hired commercial carrier, Government HHG shipment, or a combination of the above options are used to perform a PPM, the PPM reimbursement is equal to 95 percent of the Government's constructed cost.  The Personal Property Office must provide counseling and prior approval for a PPM move.  Failing to comply with Service requirements of the program may limit payment or result in complete denial of a claim.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that she should be paid for a PPM, also known as a DITY move, of her HHG shipment from Fort Riley, Kansas to her HOS in Milan, Illinois.

2.  Her contentions have been noted and the Army G-1, in an advisory opinion for this, recommends approval based on the Army’s intent.  

3.  According to the information contained in the advisory opinion, had the Army issued the applicant’s retirement orders in a timelier manner, authority for reimbursing her for her DITY expenses would have been available; it is prudent to allow the applicant to be reimbursed because the Army’s intent was to allow her a HOS move at Government expense; and changing the issue date of her order to 1 July 2008 will allow the Army’s intent.

4.  The applicant's HHG were shipped via a PPM before her orders were published releasing her from assignment and duty at Fort Riley, Kansas, and placing her on the Temporary Disability Retired List.  The applicant should have known that executing financial transactions without being in possession of official, authenticated orders authorizing such movement of HHG should not be undertaken.  However, given the circumstances in this case, and as a matter of equity, the applicant should be entitled to be reimbursed for her DITY move from Fort Riley, Kansas, to her HOS.

5.  In view of the foregoing, it would now be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.


BOARD VOTE:

____X____  ____X____  ___X_____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending Orders 228-0001 to show that they were published on 1 July 2008 and that she be paid all monies to which she is entitled upon presentation of documentation required for such a claim.




      _______ _   _XXX______   ___
       	   CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090003052



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090003052



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1