RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00149
		INDEX CODE:  128.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be reimbursed for dependent travel expenses that he incurred as result of his permanent change of station (PCS) move.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His dependents traveled via privately owned vehicle (POV) from Grand Forks AFB, ND to Minneapolis, MN, then by air with government purchased tickets to Baltimore, MD.  He was not briefed that this mixed mode of travel would not be fully covered by the government.  The Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR) authorizes his dependents travel by air from Grand Forks AFB to Baltimore via Minneapolis.  The trip to Minneapolis would have been on a small commuter aircraft, with a layover and then change of planes.  The cost of a flight from Grand Forks AFB to Minneapolis is $215.00.  It would have cost the government $645.00 if his dependents had chosen to fly.

In support of his request applicant provided a personal statement; a copy of his travel voucher; his PCS orders; an extract from the JFTR; and, an airfare estimate.  His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 16 Jul 81.  He has continued to serve on active duty entering his most recent enlistment on 30 Jul 97, when he reenlisted for a period of 4 years.  He is currently serving in the grade master sergeant having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Nov 94.

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force.  Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Compensation and Entitlements, AF/DPRCC, reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial.  DPRCC states that the applicant was reimbursed for dependent travel based on cost comparison for mixed modes of travel.  The government cost of travel minus the government airline tickets resulted in a negative value of $188.14, which was factored into the total amount paid to him for his total PCS entitlement.  If his dependents had traveled via government purchased tickets from Grand Forks AFB, via Minneapolis, to Baltimore, which was authorized, the deduction would not have been required.  Based on his statement, driving from Grand Forks AFB to Minneapolis was more convenient for his dependents and more cost effective to the government.

The payment for his dependents’ travel was accomplished in accordance with current policy in the JFTR.  This policy is in the process of being revised.  Under the revised policy, there will be no collection of excess cost from the member if deducting the cost of the government-procured transportation for the ordered travel from the monetary allowance in lieu of transportation plus flat per diem (MALT PLUS) results in a negative amount.  This policy change is pending Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) release and will be effective when published in the JFTR (see Exhibit B).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9 Mar 01 for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, after thorough review of the evidence provided we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the applicant's claim was processed in accordance with the governing regulations that were in effect at the time; and, that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice in this matter.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 probable 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 this application in Executive Session on 18 Apr 01, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Jan 01.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AF/DPRCC, dated 20 Feb 01.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 9 Mar 01.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair