B-121943, DECEMBER 9, 1954, 34 COMP. GEN. 284

B-121943: Dec 9, 1954

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

IS REGARDED AS BEING "AWAY FROM HIS DESIGNATED POST OF DUTY" WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT TERM AS USED IN SECTION 303 (A) OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949. IS ENTITLED TO PER DIEM ALLOWANCES FOR TIME SERVED IN DETACHED STATUS. 1954: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 30. IT APPEARS THAT SUCH DUTY WAS PERFORMED PURSUANT TO ORDERS OF OCTOBER 1. UPON COMPLETION OF WHICH YOU WERE TO RETURN TO YOUR STATION IN THE UNITED STATES. IT IS SHOWN THAT YOU ARRIVED AT SANGLEY POINT ON OCTOBER 12. THAT RETURN TRAVEL WAS COMMENCED ON MARCH 14. THAT FOUR TRIPS WERE MADE TO OKINAWA DURING THAT PERIOD. THE RATE AT WHICH PER DIEM IS CLAIMED INDICATES THAT BOTH GOVERNMENT QUARTERS AND MESSING FACILITIES WERE AVAILABLE AT SANGLEY POINT.

B-121943, DECEMBER 9, 1954, 34 COMP. GEN. 284

SUBSISTENCE - PER DIEMS - MILITARY, NAVAL, ETC., PERSONNEL - TEMPORARY DUTY WITH UNIT OF OWN DETACHMENT A NAVAL OFFICER, WHO UNDER ORDERS PERFORMED TEMPORARY DUTY AWAY FROM DESIGNATED POST OF DUTY WITH A UNIT OF OWN DETACHMENT, IS REGARDED AS BEING "AWAY FROM HIS DESIGNATED POST OF DUTY" WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT TERM AS USED IN SECTION 303 (A) OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949, WHICH AUTHORIZES PAYMENT OF PER DIEM ALLOWANCES FOR PERIODS OF TRAVEL AWAY FROM DESIGNATED POSTS OF DUTY, AND IS ENTITLED TO PER DIEM ALLOWANCES FOR TIME SERVED IN DETACHED STATUS. B-117935, FEBRUARY 5, 1954, OVERRULED.

ACTING COMPTROLLER GENERAL WEITZEL TO LIEUTENANT COMMANDER GEORGE CORNELIUS, DECEMBER 9, 1954:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 30, 1954, FORWARDED WITH SECOND ENDORSEMENT OF OCTOBER 6, 1954, FROM THE CHIEF OF THE BUREAU OF SUPPLIES AND ACCOUNTS, REQUESTING REVIEW OF SETTLEMENT DATED AUGUST 13, 1954, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR PER DIEM DURING THE PERIODS OCTOBER 13 TO 21, OCTOBER 26 TO NOVEMBER 15, NOVEMBER 20, 1953, TO JANUARY 28, 1954, FEBRUARY 1 TO 17 AND FEBRUARY 22 TO MARCH 13, 1954, WHILE ENGAGED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF TEMPORARY ADDITIONAL DUTY WITH DETACHMENT QUEEN, PHOTOGRAPHIC SQUADRON SIXTY-ONE, AT SANGLEY POINT, REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES.

IT APPEARS THAT SUCH DUTY WAS PERFORMED PURSUANT TO ORDERS OF OCTOBER 1, 1953, FROM THE COMMANDING OFFICER OF PHOTOGRAPHIC SQUADRON SIXTY-ONE WHICH DIRECTED YOU TO PROCEED AND REPORT TO THE OFFICER IN CHARGE, DETACHMENT QUEEN, PHOTOGRAPHIC SQUADRON SIXTY-ONE, FOR TEMPORARY ADDITIONAL DUTY IN CONNECTION WITH OPERATIONAL DEPLOYMENT FOR A PERIOD OF ABOUT FIVE MONTHS, UPON COMPLETION OF WHICH YOU WERE TO RETURN TO YOUR STATION IN THE UNITED STATES. IT IS SHOWN THAT YOU ARRIVED AT SANGLEY POINT ON OCTOBER 12, 1953, THAT RETURN TRAVEL WAS COMMENCED ON MARCH 14, 1954, AND THAT FOUR TRIPS WERE MADE TO OKINAWA DURING THAT PERIOD. THE RATE AT WHICH PER DIEM IS CLAIMED INDICATES THAT BOTH GOVERNMENT QUARTERS AND MESSING FACILITIES WERE AVAILABLE AT SANGLEY POINT. THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL INDICATED THE VIEW IN FIRST ENDORSEMENT OF APRIL 29, 1954, THAT YOU WERE NOT ENTITLED TO PER DIEM FOR THE TEMPORARY DUTY AT SANGLEY POINT SINCE YOU PERFORMED TEMPORARY DUTY WITH A UNIT OF YOUR OWN DETACHMENT.

YOUR CLAIM APPARENTLY WAS DISALLOWED ON THE BASIS OF A DECISION OF THIS OFFICE DATED FEBRUARY 5, 1954, B-117935. THAT DECISION INVOLVED AN OFFICER WHO HAD BEEN DIRECTED TO PROCEED FROM CARGO HANDLING BATTALION ONE, WILLIAMSBURG, VIRGINIA, TO CARGO HANDLING BATTALION ONE, DETACHMENT ROGER, GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA, FOR TEMPORARY DUTY. THE ORDERS STATED THAT NO PER DIEM WAS AUTHORIZED WHILE AT GUANTANAMO BAY AND THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL EXPRESSED THE VIEW THAT SUCH STATEMENT WAS PROPER SINCE THE OFFICER'S DUTY ASSIGNMENT WITH CARGO HANDLING BATTALION ONE REQUIRED DUTY AT DIFFERENT PLACES, THUS INDICATING THAT THE OFFICER WAS REGARDED ADMINISTRATIVELY AS BEING AT HIS DESIGNATED POST OF DUTY DURING THE PERIOD INVOLVED. THE DECISION IN THAT CASE AND OTHER SIMILAR CASES GAVE EFFECT TO THAT VIEW. HOWEVER, THIS OFFICE HAS NOW BEEN ADVISED THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS IN THOSE CASES GAVE AN ERRONEOUS IMPRESSION IN THAT RESPECT AND THAT TEMPORARY DUTY ACTUALLY WAS PERFORMED AWAY FROM THEIR PERMANENT STATIONS AT WHICH THE PERSONS INVOLVED PRESUMABLY HAD SECURED PERMANENT LIVING ACCOMMODATIONS AND TO WHICH TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE HAD BEEN AUTHORIZED. YOU STATED THAT SUCH TRANSPORTATION WAS NOT AUTHORIZED TO SANGLEY POINT. CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOW DISCLOSED, THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN THE DECISION OF FEBRUARY 5, 1954, DOES NOT APPEAR PROPER UNDER THE LAW AND REGULATIONS AND THAT CASE NO LONGER WILL BE FOLLOWED.

ACCORDINGLY, SETTLEMENT WILL ISSUE IN DUE COURSE ALLOWING THE PROPER AMOUNT FOUND DUE AS PER DIEM DURING THE PERIODS OF YOUR CLAIM. YOUR ORIGINAL ORDERS AND ENDORSEMENTS ARE RETURNED HEREWITH.