B-163364, JUN. 27, 1968

B-163364, JUN. 27, 1968

TO MR. A. L. ROHAN:

THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 18, 1968, WITH ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING OUR ADVANCE DECISION AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF CERTIFYING FOR PAYMENT A TRAVEL VOUCHER IN FAVOR OF MR. WILLIAM W. CANTELO FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES INCURRED INCIDENT TO HIS APPOINTMENT WITH THE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT BY LETTER DATED MARCH 3, 1966, MR. CANTELO WAS INVITED TO APPLY FOR A POSITION WITH THE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, ENTOMOLOGY RESEARCH DIVISION, ST. CROIX ISLAND, VIRGIN ISLANDS. AT THAT TIME HE WAS SERVING AS AN ENTOMOLOGY ADVISOR WITH THE AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN BANGKOK, THAILAND. MR. CANTELO DID APPLY FOR THE ST. CROIX POSITION AND BY LETTER DATED MARCH 22, 1966, HE WAS ADVISED AS FOLLOWS:

"IF IT MEETS WITH YOUR APPROVAL, WE WILL INITIATE PERSONNEL ACTION TO TRANSFER YOU TO OUR STAFF EFFECTIVE ON OR ABOUT JULY 10. IF APPROVED, YOU WOULD BE ASSIGNED TO ST. CROIX. HOWEVER, WE PROPOSE THAT YOUR TRAVEL BE VIA BELTSVILLE, MD., AND OXFORD, N.C., TO PERMIT CONFERENCES WITH MEMBERS OF OUR STAFF WHO HAVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE WORK ON ST. CROIX.'

ON APRIL 22, 1966, MR. CANTELO'S ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE IN BANGKOK, AFTER BEING ADVISED OF HIS PENDING APPOINTMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, ISSUED A TRAVEL ORDER (NO. THA-66-548) AUTHORIZING SEPARATION TRAVEL FOR MR. CANTELO AND HIS DEPENDENTS (TO BEGIN ON OR ABOUT MAY 1, 1966) AND TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS AND AUTOMOBILE FROM BANGKOK TO SOMERVILLE, MASSACHUSETTS (PLACE OF ACTUAL RESIDENCE).

ON APRIL 26, 1966, MR. CANTELO SUBMITTED A FORMAL RESIGNATION TO HIS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE WITH A REQUEST THAT HIS SEPARATION BE MADE EFFECTIVE ON THE DATE OF HIS TRANSFER TO THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. ON MAY 9, 1966, A LETTER WAS ADDRESSED TO MR. CANTELO ADVISING HIM THAT HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE POSITION ON ST. CROIX HAD BEEN APPROVED BY THE DIVISION PERSONNEL COMMITTEE. WHILE THE RECORD SUGGESTS THAT THE EMPLOYEE WAS ELIGIBLE FOR RETURN TO THE UNITED STATES FOR LEAVE PRIOR TO SERVING ANOTHER PERIOD OF SERVICE OVERSEAS, NO AUTHORIZATION TO THAT EFFECT WAS ISSUED. IN THAT REGARD, WE FIND NO EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD SHOWING THE LENGTH OF SERVICE OVERSEAS WITH AID WITHOUT LEAVE IN THE UNITED STATES.

WHILE THE RECORD CONTAINS NO VOUCHER COVERING MR. CANTELO'S TRAVEL FROM BANGKOK TO HIS RESIDENCE IN SOMERVILLE, MASSACHUSETTS, IT DOES INDICATE THAT SUCH TRAVEL WAS COMMENCED ON THE WEEKEND OF APRIL 30-MAY 1, 1966, AND THAT MR. CANTELO AND HIS FAMILY, AFTER TOURING PARTS OF EUROPE AND THE MIDDLE EAST, ARRIVED IN THIS COUNTRY ON OR ABOUT JUNE 1, 1966.

ON MAY 12, 1966, A REQUEST FOR PERSONNEL ACTION WAS SUBMITTED TO THE SOUTHERN ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION, AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, REQUESTING THE APPOINTMENT OF MR. CANTELO TO THE POSITION ON ST. CROIX. HOWEVER, DUE TO DIFFICULTIES IN OBTAINING CERTAIN PERSONNEL RECORDS, THE PERSONNEL ACTION FORM APPOINTING MR. CANTELO TO SUCH POSITION WAS NOT ISSUED UNTIL AUGUST 26, 1966. THE APPOINTMENT WAS EFFECTIVE AUGUST 28, 1966. THEREAFTER, ON OCTOBER 24, 1966, THE AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUED A PERSONNEL ACTION FORM SEPARATING MR. CANTELO FROM THAT AGENCY EFFECTIVE AUGUST 27, 1966. WE UNDERSTAND THAT DURING THE PERIOD MAY 1-AUGUST 27, 1966, MR. CANTELO WAS GRANTED ALL OF THE ANNUAL LEAVE TO HIS CREDIT AND 196 HOURS OF LEAVE WITHOUT PAY.

IN THE MEANTIME, HOWEVER, TRAVEL AUTHORIZATION NO. 33-218, DATED AUGUST 23, 1966, WAS ISSUED TO MR. CANTELO AUTHORIZING HIS TRAVEL FROM SOMERVILLE, MASSACHUSETTS, TO ST. CROIX, VIA BELTSVILLE, MARYLAND, AND OXFORD, NORTH CAROLINA, AND TRANSPORTATION OF HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY AND HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS FROM SOMERVILLE TO ST. CROIX. WITH RESPECT TO SUCH TRAVEL ORDER, YOU REPORT AS FOLLOWS:

"* * * IN VIEW OF TRAVEL AUTHORIZATION NO. THA 66-548 AUTHORIZING ALL EXPENSES ON RETURNING TO SOMERVILLE, MASSACHUSETTS, FOR SEPARATION IN MAY 1966, IT WAS ASSUMED IN SOME QUARTERS IN ARS THAT MR. CANTELO WAS NO LONGER A FEDERAL EMPLOYEE. DUE TO THIS MISUNDERSTANDING HE WAS AUTHORIZED EXPENSES ALLOWABLE FOR A NEWLY APPOINTED EMPLOYEE REPORTING FROM HIS RESIDENCE IN THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES TO ST. CROIX, VIRGIN ISLANDS, HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION OUTSIDE THE CONTINENTAL U.S., RATHER THAN THE EXPENSES ALLOWABLE FOR AN EMPLOYEE WHO (WHOSE) (SIC) OFFICIAL STATION WAS BEING CHANGED FROM BANGKOK, THAILAND, TO ST. CROIX, VIRGINIA ISLANDS.'

IN ADDITION TO THE TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES AUTHORIZED IN HIS TRAVEL ORDER OF AUGUST 23, 1966, MR. CANTELO HAS REQUESTED PAYMENT OF CERTAIN ALLOWANCES SPECIFIED IN BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A 56, REVISED, OCTOBER 12, 1966, SUCH AS PER DIEM FOR MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY (SECTION 2.2B), SUBSISTENCE WHILE OCCUPYING TEMPORARY QUARTERS (SECTION 2.5), AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES (SECTION 3). THE TRAVEL VOUCHER HAS BEEN ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED.

IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, AS OUTLINED ABOVE, SURROUNDING MR. CANTELO'S APPOINTMENT TO YOUR AGENCY, YOU HAVE DOUBT AS TO THE EXTENT OF HIS ENTITLEMENT TO TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES INCURRED INCIDENT TO HIS REPORTING FOR DUTY AT ST. CROIX.

IT IS REASONABLY CLEAR FROM THE FACTS OUTLINED ABOVE THAT MR. CANTELO WAS NOT EMPLOYED BY THE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE UNTIL AFTER HIS RETURN TO THE UNITED STATES FOR SEPARATION FROM THE AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT.

IN OUR DECISION OF JANUARY 24, 1967, B-160565, 46 COMP. GEN. 628, WE CONSIDERED A SIMILAR SITUATION AND HELD, IN PERTINENT PART, AS FOLLOWS:

"CONCERNING THE THIRD PROPOSAL, IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE EMPLOYEE WOULD BE RETURNED TO THE PLACE OF HIS ACTUAL RESIDENCE OR SOME OTHER POINT IN THE UNITED STATES FOR SEPARATION. AT THE TIME OF SUCH RETURN TRAVEL HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED BY THE NEW (ACQUIRING) AGENCY TO WHICH HE LATER TRANSFERS. SEE 44 COMP. GEN. 767. IN SUCH A CASE IT WOULD BE PROPER FOR THE OLD (LOSING) AGENCY TO PAY THE EXPENSES INCURRED IN TRAVELING TO THE PLACE OF ACTUAL RESIDENCE OR SOME OTHER SELECTED POINT IN THE UNITED STATES BUT NOT TO EXCEED THE CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF TRAVEL TO THE PLACE OF ACTUAL RESIDENCE.

"IF AFTER ARRIVING AT THE PLACE OF ACTUAL RESIDENCE THE EMPLOYEE THEN TRANSFERS TO A NEW (ACQUIRING) AGENCY WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE IT WOULD BE PROPER FOR THE ACQUIRING AGENCY TO PAY THE EXPENSES OF HIS TRAVEL FROM THE PLACE OF ACTUAL RESIDENCE OR OTHER SELECTED POINT TO THE DUTY STATION FOR THE POSITION TO WHICH HE TRANSFERS. THE ALLOWABLE COST COULD NOT EXCEED THE COST OF DIRECT TRAVEL FROM THE OLD TO THE NEW DUTY STATION, LESS THE COST INCURRED BY THE LOSING AGENCY FOR RETURN TRAVEL AS INDICATED ABOVE.'

ON THE PRESENT RECORD, THAT DECISION WOULD APPEAR TO BE APPLICABLE HERE AND MR. CANTELO MAY RETAIN ALL PAYMENTS MADE BY THE AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON ACCOUNT OF HIS RETURN TO THE UNITED STATES FOR SEPARATION EVEN IF UNDER THE RULES HEREINAFTER STATED AN EXCESS PAYMENT OTHERWISE WOULD BE PRESENT. HOWEVER, MR. CANTELO MAY BE ALLOWED THE COSTS OF TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION FROM SOMERVILLE, MASSACHUSETTS, TO ST. CROIX, ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH AND SUBJECT TO THE LIMITATIONS SET FORTH IN OUR DECISION OF JANUARY 24, 1967. SEE ALSO B-160565, JUNE 21, 1968, COPY ENCLOSED.

THE TRAVEL ORDER OF AUGUST 23, 1966, AUTHORIZED THE EMPLOYEE TO TRAVEL VIA BELTSVILLE, MARYLAND, AND OXFORD, NORTH CAROLINA, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PERFORMING TEMPORARY DUTY. SUBSEQUENTLY, MR. CANTELO WAS DIRECTED TO PERFORM TEMPORARY DUTY AT SEVERAL ADDITIONAL PLACES EN ROUTE TO ST. CROIX. IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR DECISION, CITED ABOVE, THE AMOUNT PAYABLE TO MR. CANTELO FOR HIS TRAVEL FROM SOMERVILLE TO ST. CROIX MAY NOT EXCEED THE COST OF DIRECT TRAVEL FROM BANGKOK TO ST. CROIX VIA THE VARIOUS TEMPORARY DUTY STATIONS LESS THE AMOUNT PAID BY AID FOR MR. CANTELO'S TRAVEL FROM BANGKOK TO SOMERVILLE.

MR. CANTELO'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY WAS AUTHORIZED DIRECT TRAVEL FROM SOMERVILLE TO ST. CROIX. REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE FAMILY'S DIRECT TRAVEL BETWEEN THOSE POINTS MAY NOT EXCEED THE COST OF DIRECT TRAVEL FROM BANGKOK TO ST. CROIX LESS THE AMOUNT PAID BY AID FOR THE FAMILY'S TRAVEL FROM BANGKOK TO SOMERVILLE.

WHILE THE VOUCHER TRANSMITTED WITH YOUR LETTER DOES NOT INCLUDE A CLAIM FOR TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS WE, NEVERTHELESS, POINT OUT THAT ON THE PRESENT RECORD REIMBURSEMENT THEREFOR WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE SAME LIMITATIONS STATED ABOVE WITH RESPECT TO THE TRAVEL OF MR. CANTELO'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY.

ALTHOUGH OUR DECISION OF JANUARY 24, 1967, MADE NO REFERENCE TO THE RELOCATION BENEFITS PROVIDED FOR UNDER PUBLIC LAW 89-516 (NOW 5 U.S.C. 5724A), MR. CANTELO MAY BE ALLOWED A MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES ALLOWANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3 OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56 AND SUBSISTENCE EXPENSES WHILE OCCUPYING TEMPORARY QUARTERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2.5 OF CIRCULAR NO. A-56.

ALSO, MR. CANTELO MAY BE ALLOWED PER DIEM FOR MEMBERS OF HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY UNDER SECTION 2.2B OF CIRCULAR NO. A-56 BUT SUCH PER DIEM SHOULD BE COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF UNINTERRUPTED TRAVEL FROM SOMERVILLE TO ST. CROIX. THE AMOUNT PAYABLE MAY NOT EXCEED PER DIEM FOR TRAVEL TIME DIRECT FROM BANGKOK TO ST. CROIX LESS THE PER DIEM PAID BY AID FOR THE FAMILY'S TRAVEL FROM BANGKOK TO SOMERVILLE.

THE VOUCHER IS RETURNED HEREWITH FOR HANDLING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE. ALSO TRANSMITTED HEREWITH IS A COPY OF OUR DECISION B 163364 OF MARCH 8, 1968, TO MR. CANTELO ADVISING HIM THAT FOR THE REASONS EXPRESSED THEREIN NO AMOUNT MAY BE ALLOWED FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF HIS AUTOMOBILE FROM MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO ST. CROIX.