IN THE CASE OF:	 

		BOARD DATE:	    11 October 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120003524 


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 that he be reimbursed for the personal costs incurred for the storage of his privately owned vehicle (POV) during his deployment to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom.

2.  The applicant states his deployment orders authorized him reimbursement for POV storage during his deployment; however, when he attempted to claim the cost of the storage of his POV ($845.13), he was informed it was not authorized because he was married.  He goes on to state he has always been married since entering the Army so it was not a change.  Additionally, another member of his unit had recently returned and was reimbursed for POV storage so it appears he was caught in a transition in change of policy.  He continues by stating he attempted to resolve the issue through the Office of the Inspector General and was informed by that office to apply to this Board. 

3.  The applicant provides copies of his deployment orders, his travel voucher, a letter of authorization for POV storage from the Nebraska Army National Guard (NEARNG), a copy of a receipt for POV storage, and an Inspector General Action Request (IGAR). 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was serving as an aviation chief warrant officer four (CW4) in the NEARNG on 1 July 2008 when orders 183-115 were published ordering the 


applicant to active duty in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan for a period not to exceed 240 days in a Temporary change of Station (TCS) status.  Paragraph I of those orders specifically authorized reimbursement of POV storage.

2.  He was initially transferred to Fort Benning, Georgia and then his unit was transferred to Bagram, Afghanistan on 30 July 2008.  On 15 March 2009 he was honorably released from active duty at Fort Benning.  The applicant submitted his travel voucher on 16 March 2009.

3.  On 27 October 2009, the applicant’s request for reimbursement as an exception to policy was denied by the NEARNG because in accordance with Department of the Army Personnel Policy Guidance (PPG) paragraph 8-9b, married Soldiers are not authorized POV storage unless married to another Soldier who is stationed at a different permanent duty station.

4.  On 4 November 2009 the applicant submitted an IGAR requesting assistance in obtaining reimbursement.  The results of the IGAR indicate that while POV storage fees are authorized under the Joint Federal Travel Regulations, Department of the Army guidance restricted the entitlement to single Soldiers under most circumstances.  Additionally, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) rejected the claim because there was no line of accounting for that benefit and that benefit is managed by the mobilization station which denied the request to honor his claim.

5.  The memorandum provided by the applicant from the traffic management specialist of the NEARNG indicates that there was no government storage available for the applicant at the time.

6.  Department of the Army PPG for Overseas Contingency Operations dated
1 July 2009 provides in Paragraph 8-9 - Privately Owned Vehicles (POV) the following:

	a.  POV Storage Authorization:

		(1)  POV storage is not an automatic entitlement.  All Soldiers must possess proper authorization prior to seeking POV storage.

		(2)  Soldiers may be authorized storage of one POV when deploying in support of contingency operations.  POVs will be stored in accordance with instruction provided by the local installation transportation office (ITO).


		(3)  Reserve Component personnel on TCS orders in support of contingency operations may be authorized storage at home station.

		(4)  Soldiers who are projected to leave continental United States-based assignments are not authorized movement via POV.

		(5)  Installation commanders are not authorized to grant the use of rental cars.

		(6)  All Soldiers (both Active and Reserve Component) must consult with their local ITO to ensure deployment storage eligibility and seek authorized storage options.

		(7)  Vehicles placed in storage under orders are a one-time only entitlement and may not be retrieved on leave and returned to storage under the same orders 

	b.  POV Storage Eligibility:

		(1)  POV storage may be authorized for both active duty and mobilized Reserve Component single Soldiers.

		(2)  POV storage may be authorized for Soldiers married to another service member when both are deployed and Soldiers married to another service member residing at different permanent duty stations.

		(3)  Authorized Soldiers must coordinate with the ITO to ascertain the availability of vehicle storage options.

		(4)  Reserve Component units must coordinate with servicing ITO to ascertain the availability of vehicle storage at home station first.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he should be reimbursed for his POV storage while deployed in support of contingency operations has been noted and appears to have merit.

2.  Although the PPG in effect at the time only allowed for single mobilized Reserve Component Soldiers to store their POV, the applicant’s orders clearly authorized him POV storage and it is not reasonable to presume that he would know what is contained in the PPG or that his orders were incorrect. 


3.  One of the basic tenets taught all Soldiers at the beginning of their service is that if something is not authorized in orders it is not authorized for reimbursement.  In the applicant’s case his orders clearly authoriozed POV storage.

4.  Unfortunately, the orders issued by the NEARNG erroneously authorized him POV storage during his deployment and he has relied on the orders to his detriment in the amount of $845.13 that he has spent and has not been reimbursed for.

5.  However, it is inherently unfair and unjust to penalize the Soldier for relying on duly-authenticated orders from a source he should be able to trust without having to research entitlements and have to bear the financial burden for the Department’s mistake.

6.  Therefore, in the interest of justice, the applicant should be granted an exception policy and reimbursed for his POV storage in the amount of $845.13.

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 showing an exception policy was granted and reimbursing him for his POV storage in the amount of $845.13.



      ___________X___________
                 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)                                         AR20120003524



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120003524



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1