A-72752, AUGUST 20, 1936, 16 COMP. GEN. 156

A-72752, AUGUST 20, 1936, 16 COMP. GEN. 156

EXCHANGE - LOSS BY - OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES THE WORDS "SUBSTANTIAL PERIOD OF TIME," AS USED IN DECISION OF APRIL 6, 1936, A-72752, QUOTED IN DECISION IN 15 COMP. GEN. 1125, IN CONNECTION WITH THE COMPUTATION OF EXCHANGE LOSSES OF OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES TRAVELING IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES, MEAN ANY PERIOD IN EXCESS OF THAT REQUIRED FOR MERE TRANSIT THROUGH A PARTICULAR COUNTRY.

ACTING COMPTROLLER GENERAL ELLIOTT TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, AUGUST 20, 1936:

THERE HAS BEEN RECEIVED, BY YOUR DIRECTION, A COMMUNICATION FROM THE OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL OF THE NAVY, DATED JULY 21, 1936, SYMBOL P16-3/9//L16/360709) TRANSMITTING A LETTER FROM THE CHIEF, BUREAU OF SUPPLIES AND ACCOUNTS, DATED JULY 9, 1936, ADDRESSED TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, RELATIVE TO AN EXCEPTION TAKEN BY THIS OFFICE TO A REIMBURSEMENT FOR LOSSES SUSTAINED DUE TO APPRECIATION OF FOREIGN CURRENCIES AS REPRESENTED BY VOUCHER NO. 209 IN FAVOR IN CAPT. A. T. BEAUREGARD, UNITED STATES NAVY, NAVAL ATTACHE, PARIS, FRANCE, OF THE MAY 1935 ACCOUNT OF HEWLETT THEBAUD, COMMANDER, UNITED STATES NAVY, ASSISTANT NAVAL ATTACHE, PARIS, FRANCE.

THE LETTER FROM THE CHIEF, BUREAU OF SUPPLIES AND ACCOUNTS, REFERRED TO AS THE "BASIC LETTER," ALLEGES THAT THE ACTION OF THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE IN THIS CASE, AS PER NOTICE OF EXCEPTION, FORM 2084, DATED JUNE 22, 1936, IS BASED ON THE HOLDING OF A DECISION OF THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF APRIL 6, 1936, A-72752, WHICH DECISION IT IS STATED WAS UNKNOWN AS IT HAD NEITHER BEEN PUBLISHED, STENCILED FOR DISTRIBUTION, NOR INCLUDED IN THE DAILY SYNOPSIS OF THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, WHEREAS A DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14, 1935, A-64560, PUBLISHED AS 15 COMP. GEN. 212, MAKES A RULING CONTRARY TO THAT IN DECISION OF APRIL 6, 1936, AND WAS USED AS THE BASIS FOR THE AMENDED NAVY INSTRUCTIONS DATED OCTOBER 28, 1935, P16- 3/9//L16/351028).

AN EXAMINATION OF THE VOUCHER IN QUESTION SHOWS THAT THE TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED DURING THE PERIOD MAY 2 TO MAY 17, 1935, AND WAS PAID BY THE DISBURSING OFFICER MAY 23, 1935. IT IS EVIDENT, THEREFORE, THAT NEITHER THE DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14, 1935, ON WHICH IT IS SAID THE AMENDED NAVY DEPARTMENT INSTRUCTIONS DATED OCTOBER 28, 1935, WERE BASED, NOR THE DECISION OF APRIL 6, 1936, HAD ANY DIRECT APPLICATION SO FAR AS THE PAYMENT IN QUESTION IS CONCERNED. IN A DECISION OF JANUARY 28, 1935,A- 59705 PUBLISHED AS 14 COMP. GEN. 577, IT WAS HELD THAT WHILE AN OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE IS ASSIGNED TO DUTY IN A PARTICULAR FOREIGN COUNTRY, OR WHEN TRAVEL THROUGH A FOREIGN COUNTRY IS NECESSARY ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS, THE LOSS DUE TO APPRECIATION OF FOREIGN CURRENCY IS FOR COMPUTATION AT THE BASIC RATE PRESCRIBED FOR THE PARTICULAR COUNTRY IN WHICH THE OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE IS ACTUALLY LOCATED FOR OFFICIAL PURPOSES. THE ACTUAL LOCATION FOR OFFICIAL PURPOSES OF THE OFFICER-PAYEE OF THE VOUCHER IN QUESTION DURING THE PERIOD MAY 5 TO 16, 1935, WAS IN SPAIN, AND DURING THE PERIOD MAY 2 TO 4, AND MAY 17, 1935, WAS IN FRANCE. AS THE DECISION OF JANUARY 28, 1935, WAS FOR CONSIDERATION IN MAKING REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE LOSS BY EXCHANGE IN THIS INSTANCE, AND AS THE SUSPENSION IS BASED ON THE FACTS AS STATED, IT MUST BE HELD THAT THE EXCEPTION TAKEN BY THIS OFFICE AS TO THE EXCESS PAYMENT BASED ON EXCHANGE RATES IN EFFECT IN FRANCE DURING THE PERIOD THAT THE TRAVELER WAS IN SPAIN WAS CORRECT AND IS HEREBY SUSTAINED.

WITH RESPECT TO THE REQUEST OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL, BASED ON THE LETTER OF THE CHIEF, BUREAU OF SUPPLIES AND ACCOUNTS, FOR AN INTERPRETATION OF THE WORDS "ANY SUBSTANTIAL PERIOD OF TIME" AS USED IN THE DECISION OF APRIL 6, 1936, A-72752, YOUR QUESTION WOULD APPEAR TO BE ANSWERED IN SAME DECISION IN WHICH THESE WORDS WERE USED, IT BEING STATED THEREIN:

THE DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14, 1935, A-64560, REFERRED TO IN YOUR SUBMISSION WAS RENDERED UPON THE FACTS THERE PRESENTED OF A COURIER OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT WHILE IN TRANSIT FROM HIS HEADQUARTERS, TO A POINT IN ANOTHER FOREIGN COUNTRY AND RETURN TO HEADQUARTERS, NO DELAY OCCURRING EN ROUTE FOR ANY SUBSTANTIAL PERIOD OF TIME, THE PARTICULAR EXAMPLE CITED BEING TRAVEL THROUGH ELEVEN COUNTRIES IN SOME FOURTEEN DAYS. WHERE, HOWEVER, THE TRAVEL INVOLVES SPENDING A SUBSTANTIAL PERIOD OF TIME IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY OR MORE TIME THAN IT WOULD TAKE MERELY IN TRANSIT ACROSS THAT COUNTRY, THE PROPER RULE APPLICABLE IS THAT STATED IN THE DECISION 14 COMP. GEN. 857; THAT IS TO SAY, COMPUTATON AT THE RATE IN FORCE IN THE PARTICULAR COUNTRY ON THE LAST DAY OF TRAVEL WITHIN THAT COUNTRY OR THE LAST DAY OF EACH MONTH WITHIN THE TRAVEL PERIOD.

ACCORDINGLY, A SUBSTANTIAL PERIOD OF TIME MAY BE SAID TO BE ANY PERIOD IN EXCESS OF THAT REQUIRED FOR MERE TRANSIT THROUGH A PARTICULAR COUNTRY. (SEE ALSO 15 COMP. GEN. 1123.)

THERE IS ALSO NOTED THE FURTHER REQUEST OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL THAT THIS OFFICE SET A NEW DATE,"APPROXIMATELY OCTOBER 1, 1936, FROM WHICH TIME THE NEW RULING HEREIN REQUESTED WILL APPLY AND THAT ALL PAYMENTS MADE PRIOR TO THAT DATE IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXISTING INSTRUCTIONS BE ALLOWED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE DISBURSING OFFICERS CONCERNED.' AS THE DECISION OF APRIL 6, 1936, A-72752, DID NOT MAKE A NEW NOR CHANGE A PRIOR INTERPRETATION OF THE ACT OF MARCH 26, 1934, 48 STAT. 466, AND THE EXECUTIVE ORDERS ISSUED PURSUANT THERETO, THE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE SUCH AS TO JUSTIFY THE POSTPONING OF ITS EFFECTIVE DATE NOR THE ALLOWANCE OF CREDIT IN DISBURSING OFFICERS' ACCOUNTS FOR PAYMENTS OF EXCHANGE RELIEF HERETOFORE MADE, IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE DECISIONS OF THIS OFFICE.