ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD DATE: 16 August 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180014882 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * reimbursement for shipment of Household Goods (HHG) to Germany * personal appearance before the Board APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Permanent Change of Station (PCS) timeline * assignment instructions * email regarding post housing * email regarding dual entitlements * PCS orders * letter from son's school * email regarding type of PCS tour * corrected copy of PCS orders * moving and storage bill * command sponsorship approval * email regarding family travel * email regarding shipment of HHG * request for exception to policy (ETP) for HHG shipment * amendment to PCS Orders * email regarding amendment orders * email regarding shipping HHG * memorandum in support of ETP * ETP disapproval * invoice for shipment of HHG to Germany * Germany storage receipt * bill of landing * email regarding appeal to ETP * email regarding improper counseling for shipment of HHG * request for assistance from West Point * email from BG S * email to BG S FACTS: 1. The applicant states: * he is requesting reimbursement of $8,539.01 for expenses he incurred by shipping his HHGs to Germany * prior to and during his PCS, multiple military organizations provided incorrect information to him * this resulted in the Army G1 determining the Army would not move or store his HHGs * he was forced to move the HHGs at his own expense to Germany * the applicant included a timeline of his PCS for the Board's consideration 2. The applicant provides a timeline of his PCS which states, in pertinent part: * he received his orders for an accompanied tour to Germany from West Point * based on his son's learning issues and recent changes in school, he determined he needed to stay in West Point until he completed his 5th year of school * he received an email from the housing office in Germany explaining housing if he went to Germany unaccompanied * he requested an extension in his lease at West Point and learned his landlord was selling the house * he went to the West Point Transportation Office, MPD Office, and Military Pay Office for counseling and was informed he could move his family locally * once his orders were changed to accompanied, he could then move his family to Germany * he received an email from the West Point Military Pay Office informing him he would have to change his tour to unaccompanied * he received orders for an accompanied tour to Germany * he received a letter from his son's school saying his son should remain in the school until after his 5th year * he requested a waiver from Army G1 to receive basic housing allowance (BHA) in West Point while receiving overseas housing allowance (OHA) in Germany * scheduled his family to make a local move in West Point based on advice from the pay office and transportation office * he received his unaccompanied orders * he ensured he did everything correct in scheduling his move through the transportation office * he moved his family locally and placed his additional HHGs in storage at a cost of $3,122 to the government * he PCS'ed to Germany without HHG or unaccompanied baggage with no cost to the government * his son was diagnosed with diabetes which caused them to need an updated to the exceptional family member program (EFMP) * he submitted his updated EFMP paperwork and command sponsor packet * he received approval for the EFMP and command sponsorship * he received his family travel orders * he received an email verifying he had everything he needed to move his family to Germany * he went to the West Point Transportation officer to give them his family's travel orders and set a date for the movers * he was informed by West Point Transportation there was a problem with his PCS stating the Government could not ship his HHG to Germany or store them in the States * he was advised they would need an ETP to ship the HHG * he submitted his ETP * he received family travel orders with a new funding code * he has an ETP submitted on his behalf * he received a denied request for ETP * he coordinated private shipment of his HHGs to Germany * his family arrived in Germany * he paid a total of $8,539.01 to ship his 6,440 pounds of HHGs to Germany * he learned his only option is to send an application to the ABCMR * he contacted the Chief of Staff of West Point about the issues * the Chief of Staff denied his request for a statement from West Point saying there was no evidence he was counseled in error * his senior rater advised him to resubmit the ETP * his senior rater received an email saying the ABCMR was his only option 3. The applicant states further in his timeline, he has expended a large amount of time and resources in an attempt to correct the injustice. The circumstances affecting his PCS made the family have a difficult decision. The decision was made based on the advice of government employees. He was placed in a position to either stay in Germany for another year unaccompanied or pay for the move out of pocket. He chose to pay for the move. He believes in the mission he was picked to perform and believed the Army would correct this wrong by reimbursing the expenses incurred. 4. The applicant provides: * assignment instructions to Germany * an email from the housing office in Germany stating on-base housing was mandatory for all accompanied service members * an email from the Director of Defense Military Pay in West Point stating if he was seeking dual entitlements to receive both BHA and OHA he would have to request an unaccompanied tour and later request command sponsorship when his family was ready to travel * his initial PCS Orders showing he was going to be accompanied and authorizing the shipment of HHGs * a letter from his son's school stating it is better for his son, given his illness, to remain in the school through his 5th grade * email instructing the applicant to choose an unaccompanied tour to Germany with instructions he could apply for an accompanied tour when his family was ready to move * email regarding amending applicant's PCS orders from accompanied to unaccompanied * corrected copy of applicant's PCS orders for an unaccompanied tour * moving and storage bill in the amount of $3,122.00 * approved command sponsorship effective 11 January 2017 * email regarding family travel * amendment to applicant's PCS orders authorizing family members to travel and shipment of HHG from West Point, New York * email regarding the Movement Designator Code * email from West Point Transportation office stating applicant cannot use his orders for shipping HHG to Germany because he already used them to do a local shipment * invoice for shipment of HHG to Germany in the amount of $7,474.00 * invoice for storage of HHG in Germany in the amount of 907.78 Euro * Bill of Lading showing applicant shipped 6,440 pounds to Germany * email stating the only option the applicant has is to appeal to the ABCMR for reimbursement of his HHG shipment * email from the Chief of Staff of West Point stating his team conducted a preliminary inquiry based on the applicant's request and it was found the transportation office advised the applicant he could only use his PCS once to ship HHG * email from the applicant to the Chief of Staff of West Point asking for assistance * email to the Director of Operations, Readiness, and Mobilization at the Pentagon requesting for assistance * email from the Director of Operations, Readiness, and Mobilization at the Pentagon stating the applicant should contact the ABCMR for assistance 5. The applicant requested an ETP on 24 March 2017, which stated, in part: * he requested an ETP to authorize shipment of his HHG to Germany and to non- temporary storage in New York * he PCSed from West Point to Germany in April 2016 on unaccompanied orders * his family remained in New York but the lease on their rented house was up * they were forced to relocate locally * his son was diagnosed with Type I Diabetes so the family felt it was important for them to remain in New York initially while the applicant moved to Germany * HHG goods were moved in March 2015 from one location in New York to another * the applicant's privately owned vehicle was shipped to Germany * prior to moving his family locally, the applicant was counseled by the West Point Transportation Office that he could move his family locally and when his orders were changed from unaccompanied to accompanied he could move them again to Germany * he received command sponsorship approval in January 2017 * he is attempting to ship his HHG to Germany, but is being told he cannot * he felt he was incorrectly counseled and is requesting an ETP to move his family to Germany and place additional HHGs in his non-temporary storage in New York 6. European Plans and Operation Center, Chief of Staff wrote a memorandum in support of the applicant's ETP request. The memorandum states, in part: * the applicant is currently serving an unaccompanied tour to Germany * the applicant chose to change his orders from an accompanied tour to unaccompanied to stabilize his family in New York because of his son's health issues * the applicant received command sponsorship in January 2017 to move his family from West Point to Germany * the applicant's family was forced to move out of the home they were renting in New York due to the impending sale of that home * based on information provided by the Transportation Office at West Point, the applicant used $3,122 of his PCS entitlements to fund a local move * the applicant was advised this move would not affect his ability to move HHG to Germany at a later date * this proved to be untrue as the applicant began to make arrangement to ship his HHG to Germany and was denied * it is unreasonable to expect a service member to move his HHG from the United States to Germany at personal expense * failure to grant the ETP would undermine the US Army Europe staff's stability and continuity in a critical low-density mission * the lengthy identification and training of officers in the applicant's area of expertise prohibits rapid assignment and replacement of personnel * allowing the applicant to move his HHG at government expense will allow them to keep the trained and experienced officer on station 7. The applicant received an email on 11 May 2017 stating his ETP was disapproved. The email states, in part: * after a thorough review of the case and in discussion with the transportation office and Germany's family travel office, the request was disapproved * the Army does not have authority to move the applicant's dependents or HHGs after the PCS orders had already been executed for the same purpose * unless the applicant could provide evidence to support he was told by an Army official the Army would move his family to Germany after making a local move, he would not be eligible for another shipment of HHG * when the command sponsorship was processed in Germany, they were not aware the applicant had already moved his family and used his HHG entitlement * they also were not aware the applicant had already sent a request for ETP straight to Headquarters, Department of the Army and not through their office * the applicant should have known if not under this PCS order but under his previous PCS briefings and assignments, that one can only move once under a PCS order 8. Volume 1 (Uniformed Service Personnel) of the JTR contains basic statutory regulations concerning official travel and transportation of members of the uniformed services. a. Paragraph 051301 (Basic Transportation) states, a Service member can move his or her HHG in as many lots as desired from one or more locations. However, the Government’s obligation, and maximum payment, is what the cost would be to transport the Service member’s maximum weight allowance between authorized locations in one lot at the Government’s “Best Value” cost. For a U.S. Public Health Service member, the limitation is to the Government’s “Best Value,” the overall lowest cost, or other USPHS-selected method. DTR 4500.9-R, Part IV, Chapter 403 (Best Value) contains details on “Best Value” costs, including when a boat or personal watercraft exceeding 14 feet, with the trailer, is transported as HHG. b. Once the Government has transported HHG, no further transportation of that HHG is authorized under the same order for a Service member’s convenience to another place. c. If a Service member does not transport the total authorized HHG weight allowance to a new permanent duty station (PDS), the remainder of the weight allowance can be transported at a later date. The HHG must have been in the Service member’s possession before the effective date of the PCS order from the PDS where the HHG was not transported. The Government’s cost to transport the HHG is limited to the cost to transport the PCS weight allowance in one lot from the old PDS to the new PDS. 9. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) states an applicant is not entitled to a hearing before the ABCMR. Hearings may be authorized by a panel of the ABCMR or by the Director of the ABCMR. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents and evidence in the records. The Board considered the applicant’s statement, the circumstances of his PCS, the sale of the house his family occupied, the medical concerns of his dependent, the change in is orders to unaccompanied and the subsequent command sponsorship of his family to Germany. The Board considered the partial movement of his HHGs upon receipt of orders and the applicant’s expenses to move a portion of his HHGs to Germany. The Board also reviewed the authorizations for movement of HHGs associated with individual orders. The Board found that it was unjust that the applicant was not authorized movement of HHGs up to his allowance upon approval to move his family to Germany and that he should be reimbursed up to the limit of his allowance. As such, the Board determined that an exception to policy was warranted to allow for reimbursement of the expense of transporting HHG to Germany. 2. The applicant's request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered. In this case, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision. As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case. 3. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was warranted. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF :X :X :X GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by reimbursing the applicant for his expenses associated with moving HHGs to Germany, up to his authorized limit. 2. The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to the applicant’s request for a personal appearance. X 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. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or request additional evidence or opinions. Additionally, it states in paragraph 2-11 that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. 2. Volume 1 (Uniformed Service Personnel) of the Joint Travel Regulation (JTR) contains basic statutory regulations concerning official travel and transportation of members of the uniformed services. a. Paragraph 051301 (Basic Transportation) states, a Service member can move his or her HHG in as many lots as desired from one or more locations. However, the Government’s obligation, and maximum payment, is what the cost would be to transport the Service member’s maximum weight allowance between authorized locations in one lot at the Government’s “Best Value” cost. For a U.S. Public Health Service member, the limitation is to the Government’s “Best Value,” the overall lowest cost, or other USPHS-selected method. DTR 4500.9-R, Part IV, Chapter 403 (Best Value) contains details on “Best Value” costs, including when a boat or personal watercraft exceeding 14 feet, with the trailer, is transported as HHG. b. (Authorized Locations) authorized locations include, but are not limited to, any combination of the following locations: * Origin is from a residence or quarters to a packing, crating, or storage facility * packing or crating facility to quarters or residence when a portion of the HHG, after being packed and crated, is to join the remainder of the HHG * packing or crating facility to a storage facility * residence or quarters to a carrier’s location * packing, crating, or storage facility to a carrier’s location * the incoming carrier’s location to a storage facility * a storage facility to an outgoing carrier’s location * an incoming carrier’s location to an outgoing carrier’s location * carrier’s location to a residence or quarters, or a storage location * storage location to a residence or quarters. c. Once the Government has transported HHG, no further transportation of that HHG is authorized under the same order for a Service member’s convenience to another place. d. If a Service member does not transport the total authorized HHG weight allowance to a new permanent duty station (PDS), the remainder of the weight allowance can be transported at a later date. The HHG must have been in the Service member’s possession before the effective date of the PCS order from the PDS where the HHG was not transported. The Government’s cost to transport the HHG is limited to the cost to transport the PCS weight allowance in one lot from the old PDS to the new PDS.