RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00539 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive full reimbursement of $2,449.21 for expenses he incurred as a result of his Personally Procured Move (PPM) and his PPM reimbursement entitlement be extended back to time of his move. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He is being denied a PPM reimbursement entitlement due to the fact he was not made aware he needed to have retirement orders in hand when he moved his family. Prior to his move, he contacted the Traffic Management Office (TMO) and asked if he could be reimbursed. He was informed that as long as he had retirement orders and all supporting receipts from the move in hand at the time his paperwork was filed he would be reimbursed. In support of his request, the applicant provides documentation associated with his move, DD Form 1351-2, Travel Voucher or Subvoucher, and DD Form 2278, Application for Do It Yourself Move (DITY) and Counseling Checklist. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently in the Regular Air Force in the grade of master sergeant. On 9 September 2010, pursuant to his retirement orders, the applicant effected a PPM of 7,380 pounds of household goods (HHGs) from Vandenberg Air Force Base, California to Commerce City, Colorado. On 18 January 2011, the applicant submitted a DD Form 2278 and supporting documentation in order to receive reimbursement for the PPM of his HHGs. The Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR), paragraph U5330-G, advises that a request for transportation of HHGs prior to receipt of orders is not authorized unless the request is supported by: (1) statement from approving official that member was advised an order would be issued; (2) member-signed written agreement to pay any additional cost incurred if new duty station named in order is different than in the statement; and (3) member-signed written agreement to pay entire transportation cost if orders are not later issued to authorize transportation. AFI 36-3203, Service Retirements, paragraph 2.13.1, further advises that the only documents that authorize the entitlement are the retirement order or a message from the order-publishing authority approving the retirement with the retirement order number and the retirement order date. Per Special Order AC-004749, the applicant will be released from active duty for the purpose of retirement from the Air Force effective 1 December 2011. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: PPA HQ/ECAF recommends denial. ECAF states the JFTR is very specific in allowing reimbursement only if authorization for shipment existed at the time shipment was made. Members are required to be counseled and complete the DD Form 2278 prior to making a PPM. His inquiry about shipping his property prior to receipt of orders does not suffice as an official counseling. Further, he has provided no substantiation for his assertion that he was miscounseled. The complete ECAF evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluations was forwarded to the applicant on 6 May 2011, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a 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 error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we do not find his contentions sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility. Therefore, we adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Absent persuasive evidence that he was denied rights to which he was entitled, we find no 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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-00539 in Executive Session on 21 June 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 January 2011, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. PPA HQ/ECAF, Letter, dated 20 April 2011. Exhibit D. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 6 May 2011, w/atch. Panel Chair