IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  13 October 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120022030 


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 increased household goods (HHG) weight allowance during his permanent change of station (PCS) family move from Fort Wainwright, Alaska, to Germany. 

2.  The applicant states he submitted a formal request through the Office of Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel (G-1) and Logistics (G-4) channels in the Pentagon to request a higher weight allowance due to the recent addition to his family of his mother-in-law.  Shortly before his last deployment to Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in 2011, his father-in-law passed away and it was decided at that time with his wife that they would make every attempt to provide 100% care for his mother-in-law in Florida.  He deployed later that year and during his deployment, his mother-in-law's HHG were brought to Alaska where he was stationed, at his own expense.  He was then set to PCS to Germany after redeployment and found out that due to exceptional family member issues, his mother-in-law was not going to be able to travel concurrently with them and they found this out exactly 2 weeks prior to flying to Germany, thus giving them no time at all to account for her HHG that had already been packed by the movers as they assumed she would be good to go with the family.  Now, even if she had come with them, they still would have been overweight per his weight allowance limitations, which is why he requested the weight increase through the G1/G4 channels.  When he first introduced the memorandum for record (MFR) up the channels, he was directed by G4/G1 to conduct a "witness Re-weigh," and he did so in October when his HHG arrived in Germany.  As per the denial response he received from the G4/G1, it only pertained to a response received about transport regulations and they found no error in the procedures.  He understands that nothing in error was conducted but he was requesting the weight increase due to the fact that his wife and he were bringing her mother in as a recognized dependent within the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS).  At this time, they are forced to downsize significantly (6 total dependents) as he will have to once again PCS in a few years back to the States.

3.  The applicant provides:

* Officer Record Brief
* Request for weight increase authorization
* Re-weight memorandum
* DD Form 1299 (Application for Shipment and/or Storage of Personal Property)
* PCS orders from Fort Drum, New York, to Fort Wainwright, Alaska, and amendments
* PCS orders from Fort Wainwright, Alaska, to Germany and amendments
* DD Form 2278 (Application for Do It Yourself Move [DITY] and Counseling Checklist)

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer and executed an oath of office on 8 December 2004.  He was promoted to captain (CPT) on 1 March 2008. 

2.  He was reassigned from Fort Lee, Virginia, to Fort Wainwright, AK, on
13 January 2010.  He was authorized concurrent travel of dependents (spouse, four children, and two wards) to economy quarters.  

3.  On or about 28 April 2011, he deployed from Alaska to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom.  He returned to Alaska on or about 1 May 2012. 

4.  On 3 July 2012, he was issued PCS orders for reassignment to Germany, with a report date of on or about 10 September 2012.  He was authorized concurrent travel of dependents (spouse, four children, and two wards) to economy quarters.  The orders also authorized him to keep a parent at a designated location: Ocala, Florida.  

5.  On 5 July 2012, he submitted an application for shipment of personal property from Fort Wainwright, Alaska, to Kaiserslautern, Germany.  He estimated the weight of his HHG as 12,000 pounds and his professional books, papers, and equipment as 600 pounds. 

6.  On 30 July 2012, he submitted a DD Form 2278 for a DITY move of 820 pounds.   He indicated his maximum authorized weight is 14,500 pounds and he is entitled to a DITY move from Fort Wainwright, Alaska to Ocala, Florida. 

7.  On 30 August 2012, he submitted a memorandum for record, titled: Request for Weight Increase Authorization of HHG.  He cited extenuating family circumstances, challenges with his pin-point assignment to Germany, issues with the command sponsorship request, and challenges with bringing his mother-in-law to Germany. 

8.  His HHG were packed/picked up on 25 July 2012 and delivered on or about 29 October 2012.  The official actual gross weight was 26,460 pounds and the net weight was 20,560 pounds.  His professional gear weight was 1,740 pounds. 

9.  As a result of having excess weight, he incurred a debt.  

10.  On 18 October 2012, after the applicant submitted a re-weight memorandum for record, officials at the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 and G-4, reviewed the applicant's request to waive the indebtedness resulting from exceeding his prescribed weight allowance.  The officials did not find an error on the part of the Army that would indicate the Army erred in advising the applicant of his entitlements or acted inappropriately in weighing the shipment.  As such, G-1 and G-4 officials could not support his request for his debt to be vacated. 

11.  An advisory opinion was obtained from the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, on 29 April 2013 in the processing of this case.  The G-1 official stated:

	a.  The documents provided by the applicant regarding his request for an increased HHG weight allowance during his PCS family move from Fort Wainwright, Alaska to Germany were reviewed.  The G-1 official recommends approval of his request for an increased weight allowance to 18,000 pounds for this move only.

	b.  The compressed timeline he experienced after his dependent mother-in-law was denied command sponsorship due to her medical issues contributed to his overweight shipment to Germany.  Consequently, approval of an increased HHG weight allowance is justified. 

	c.  The applicant would continue to be responsible for all excess HHG shipment costs for HHG shipped in excess of 18,000 pounds maximum weight allowance authorized in the Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR).  Constructed shipment cost is based on the cost of transporting the member's maximum HHG weight allowance in one lot between Fort Wainwright, Alaska, and Kaiserslautern, Germany (JFTR Paragrph U5310-1A).  Computations include 840 pounds HHG DITY move from Fort Wainwright, Alaska to Ocala, Florida, and Government shipment of HHG from Fort Wainwright, Alaska, to Germany. 

12.  The applicant was provided with a copy of this advisory opinion but he did not respond within the allotted timeframe. 

13.  The JFTR states in:

	a.  Paragraph 5310-1A, subject to the conditions in paragraph U5310, a member ordered on a PCS is authorized HHG transportation (paragraph U5310-A9); dependent transportation (paragraph U5201); and mobile home transportation (paragraph U5500).  The Government HHG transportation obligation is limited to the cost of the completed movement of HHG equal in weight to a member’s weight allowance (paragraph U5310-B) in one lot between authorized places at the lowest overall cost (except for a personally procured transportation move) to the Government.  HHG authorized locations for PCS are in paragraph U5390-B.

	b.  Paragraph U5340 clarifies that a member/employee is still financially responsible for excess weight charges, even if the weight status was known prior to transportation and the transportation officer failed to notify the member/employee of the weight status.  The Secretary concerned or the Secretarial Process, at Service discretion, for each Service may authorize a higher weight allowance (not to exceed 18,000 lbs) for a member below pay grade O-6, but only on a case-by-case basis.  Erroneous advice, or lack thereof, by a Government agent does not create an entitlement to reimbursement of or transportation of HHG in excess of the weight allowed by statute.  A Service must be repaid for the cost of transporting a member’s HHG in excess of the prescribed weight allowance, unless an increased weight allowance (Not To Exceed 18,000 lbs) has been specifically authorized. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was ordered on a PCS move from Fort Wainwright, Alaska, to Germany.  Upon receipt of his PCS orders, he had just redeployed from Afghanistan.  He faced many challenges in the form of obtaining command-sponsorship for his family including his mother-in-law, pin-point assignment with medical facilities, prospective schools for his children at the gaining command, and other challenges encountered by Soldiers upon PCS. 

2.  It appears his intent was to bring his mother-in-law to Germany but as that did not work out, he conducted a DITY move to move her and some of her belongings from Fort Wainwright, Alaska, to Ocala, Florida.  Nevertheless, when he conducted his final HHG shipment to Germany, the actual HHG weight exceeded that authorized by law for his grade and family.  As a result, he incurred a debt to the Government.  

3.  The limited timeline he experienced after his dependent mother-in-law was denied command sponsorship due to medical issues, coupled with the stress of a PCS move to an overseas command and his recent return from a year-long deployment, clearly contributed to his overweight shipment to Germany.  

4.  As a matter of equity, he should be authorized a higher weight allowance not to exceed 18,000 pounds.  He remains responsible for all excess HHG shipment costs for HHG shipped in excess of 18,000 pounds.  Constructed shipment cost is based on the cost of transporting his maximum HHG weight allowance in one lot between Fort Wainwright, Alaska, and Kaiserslautern, Germany, and includes the 840 pounds HHG DITY move from Fort Wainwright, Alaska to Ocala, Florida, and Government shipment of HHG from Fort Wainwright, Alaska, to Germany. 

5.  His records should be corrected 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 showing the applicant was authorized an increased HHG weight allowance not to 




exceed 18,000 pounds in connection with his September 2012 permanent change of station move only. 



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20120022030





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120022030



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1