RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04911 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be entitled to travel, per diem, and Dislocation Allowance (DLA) at the with-dependent rate. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her spouse traveled with her during a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) move from Sheppard AFB, TX, (Wichita Falls, TX) to Maxwell AFB, AL, (XXXXXXX, AL) from 31 Jul 12 - 1 Aug 12. Although, he lived in Alabama at the time, he was with her in Texas, helping her pack up the house and drove the rental truck, while she was driving her POV, back to their home in XXXXXXX, AL. She feels she should receive the entitlements, to include his travel, per diem, and the dependent rate DLA. In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her PCS orders, travel voucher, and email correspondence between her, the Military Personnel Flight (MPF), and the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC). The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Based on the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), on 20 Jun 12, the applicant was issued PCS orders for reassignment from Sheppard AFB, TX to Maxwell-Gunter AFB, AL. On 31 Jul 12, the applicant performed a PCS from Sheppard AFB, TX to Maxwell-Gunter AFB, AL and her dependent spouse was listed on the PCS orders. She had a Report Not Later Than Date (RNLTD) of 30 Aug 12. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AF/A1PA recommends denial, stating, in part that in order for the applicant to receive the dependent allowances, the dependent must be "moving" in connection with the PCS from Sheppard AFB, TX to Maxwell-Gunter AFB, AL. The dependent spouse could not "move" from Sheppard since he never relocated to Sheppard. In connection with the PCS move from Sheppard AFB TX, the dependent spouse was not establishing a permanent residence in Alabama as it was already considered his permanent residence. As a result, the Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR) does not permit payment of dependent travel allowances. Similarly, since the applicant’s dependent did not relocate in connection with a PCS, she is not authorized DLA at the with-dependent rate. A1PA notes that the JFTR U5200, paragraph entitled, PURPOSE prescribes a dependent's travel and transportation allowances incident to a PCS move and under unusual or emergency circumstances. Furthermore, JFTR U5201B3 states that dependent travel and transportation allowances are not payable for dependent travel between points otherwise authorized in this paragraph to a place at which they do not intend to establish a permanent residence (including pleasure trips). Per JFTR U5610Al, a member with a dependent(s) is authorized a DLA when the dependent(s) relocates in connection with a PCS. Although the PCS orders from Sheppard AFB TX reflect an authorization for dependent travel to Maxwell-Gunter AL, the fact is that the dependent never formally/permanently resided at the permanent duty station of Sheppard AFB TX. Based on the application and supporting documents, it appears that at most, the dependent spouse made occasional visits, the most notable of which was to assist with packing up for the military sponsor's move from Sheppard to Maxwell Gunter. The complete A1PA evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 31 Mar 13 for review and response. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). ________________________________________________________________ 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. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and opinion stated by the Air Force office of primary responsibility appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by the applicant. Absent convincing evidence the applicant has been denied rights to which entitled, appropriate directives were not followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, 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-2012-04911 in Executive Session on 27 Aug 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Oct 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AF/A1PA, dated 21 Mar 13, w/atchs. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Mar 13.