RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00942
		INDEX NUMBER:  128.10

	XXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXX-XX-XXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His indebtedness to the Government in the amount of $1,458.89 for shipment of excess household goods (HHG) be waived.

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He had to report to work during his pack out and went TDY for one month the day after resulting in his professional gear not all being properly marked or weighed.

His family has suffered hardship due to the moves he has had to make, including moving his daughter as she was going into her senior year of high school.  He has done another PCS move since the one involving the contested charges.  He has left his family in place, however, to allow his son to finish high school.  This has placed him in the position of maintaining two households, helping his daughter with college, getting his son ready for college, and being separated from his family.  He states that he honestly doesn’t know if he can make the payments associated with this indebtedness.

The applicant’s complete submission us at Exhibit A.

_______________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is presently serving on active duty in the grade of lieutenant colonel.  His Total Active Federal Military Service Date is 8 June 1988.  A review of his last ten performance reports reflects overall ratings of “meets standards.”

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 Commander, Joint Personal Property Shipping Office, JPPSO/CC, evaluated this application and recommends denial of the applicant’s request.

Per Special Order AB-1125, dated 7 July 1998, as amended by order AB-1134, dated 9 Jul 1998, the applicant made a permanent change of station from Hickam AFB, Hawaii to Fort Collins, Colorado.  He made three shipments of personal property in conjunction with his PCS.  The applicant was billed $3,122.62 for exceeding the authorized weight allowance of 17,500 pounds.  He filed a rebuttal of the charges stating that the calculations did not deduct the full amount of professional gear.  The Excess Cost Adjudication Function (ECAF) determined that the applicant had indeed shipped property in excess of the prescribed weight allowance.  However, using the carrier’s descriptive inventories as guides and applying the cube rule of 40 pounds per cubic foot, they increased the amount of professional books, papers, and equipment (PBP&E) in all three shipments.  The excess charges were then reduced to $2,650.04 vice the $3,122.62.

The applicant submitted a second rebuttal requesting additional PBP&E credit.  To accomplish the review, copies of the complete household goods inventories were requested from the origin transportation office in Hawaii.  ECAF again reviewed the case and determined a reduction in the excess cost charges was warranted.  As a result, the excess cost charges owed by the applicant was reduced to $1,458.89 vice $2,650.04.

The applicant is requesting a waiver of the remaining indebtedness.  The applicant has not provided any information to support a probable error or injustice with the manner in which his HHG were packed or shipped.  He does not argue that he was unaware of the requirements necessary to receive credit for PBP&E.  Indeed, he states that he has moved several times before and is familiar with weight requirements.  He further states that on previous moves he had around 3,500 pounds of professional gear.  He received a total weight credit of 4,108 pounds for professional goods.  

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6 July 2001 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a response has not been received.

_______________________________________________________________

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, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board notes that the applicant states that on previous moves he had around 3500 pounds or more of professional gear.  He has been given credit for 4,108 pounds of professional gear and his debt was reduced from $3,122.62 to $1458.89.  It appears to the Board that the applicant’s case was fairly evaluated and that he has received appropriate relief.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_______________________________________________________________

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 16 August 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Apr 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, JPPSO/CC, dated 26 Jun 01.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 6 Jul 01.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair