B-125323, DEC. 12, 1955

B-125323: Dec 12, 1955

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

TENNESSEE: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 1. THAT YOUR REQUEST WAS DISAPPROVED. THAT YOU WERE ADVISED YOU MIGHT SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR EARLY DISCHARGE FOR THAT PURPOSE. YOUR APPLICATION FOR DISCHARGE WAS DISAPPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 18. YOU WERE TRANSFERRED TO FORT MCCLELLAN. WHERE YOUR DISCHARGE WAS EFFECTED ON NOVEMBER 15. IT BEING SHOWN IN THE DISCHARGE ORDERS THAT YOUR HOME WAS CHICAGO. BOTH YOU AND YOUR SUPERIORS KNEW THAT YOU WERE LEAVING MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN COLLEGE AND THAT YOU WOULD EITHER GO TO DENTAL SCHOOL OR ON EXTENDED ACTIVE DUTY. YOU STATE THAT THE INITIAL DISAPPROVAL OF YOUR DISCHARGE WAS IN RROR. THAT THE SHIPMENT IN QUESTION WAS MADE UPON DIRECTION OF THE TRANSPORTATION OFFICER.

B-125323, DEC. 12, 1955

TO MR. LAWRENCE F. MOORE, GALLAWAY, TENNESSEE:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 1, 1955, REQUESTING REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT OF MARCH 14, 1955, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST OF SHIPPING YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS FROM HATTIESBURG, MISSISSIPPI, TO MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE, WHILE SERVING AS MASTER SERGEANT, UNITED STATES ARMY.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON MARCH 26, 1952, WHILE STATIONED AT MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN COLLEGE, HATTIESBURG, MISSISSIPPI, YOU REQUESTED TEMPORARY DUTY OR EXCESS LEAVE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ATTENDING AN ACCREDITED DENTAL SCHOOL WITH SUBSEQUENT EXTENDED ACTIVE DUTY AS A DENTAL OFFICER; THAT YOUR REQUEST WAS DISAPPROVED, AND THAT YOU WERE ADVISED YOU MIGHT SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR EARLY DISCHARGE FOR THAT PURPOSE. ON APRIL 31, 1952, IN ANTICIPATION OF APPROVAL OF YOUR REQUEST FOR DISCHARGE, YOU MADE INQUIRY AS TO WHETHER YOU COULD SHIP YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS TO MEMPHIS AT PERSONAL EXPENSE AT THAT TIME AND SUBMIT VOUCHER AND ORDERS LATER, STATING THAT YOU AND YOUR WIFE HAD ALREADY PURCHASED A SMALL FARM IN TENNESSEE. INDORSEMENT DATED MAY 1, 1952, THE TRANSPORTATION OFFICER SUGGESTED THAT YOU MIGHT MOVE YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS AT YOUR OWN EXPENSE AND FILE A CLAIM UPON RECEIPT OF ORDERS. YOU SHIPPED YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS ON MAY 16, 1952. YOUR APPLICATION FOR DISCHARGE WAS DISAPPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 18,1952. BY PARAGRAPH 1, SPECIAL ORDERS NO. 228, DATED NOVEMBER 5, 1952, HOWEVER, YOU WERE TRANSFERRED TO FORT MCCLELLAN, ALABAMA, WHERE YOUR DISCHARGE WAS EFFECTED ON NOVEMBER 15, 1952, PRIOR TO NORMAL EXPIRATION OF ENLISTMENT, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ATTENDING DENTAL SCHOOL, IT BEING SHOWN IN THE DISCHARGE ORDERS THAT YOUR HOME WAS CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.

IN YOUR PRESENT LETTER YOU STATE THAT IN APRIL 1952, BOTH YOU AND YOUR SUPERIORS KNEW THAT YOU WERE LEAVING MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN COLLEGE AND THAT YOU WOULD EITHER GO TO DENTAL SCHOOL OR ON EXTENDED ACTIVE DUTY. ALSO, YOU STATE THAT THE INITIAL DISAPPROVAL OF YOUR DISCHARGE WAS IN RROR; THAT YOU ACTUALLY ENTERED THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE IN MEMPHIS IN SEPTEMBER 1952, HAVING BEEN PLACED ON LEAVE, AND THAT THE SHIPMENT IN QUESTION WAS MADE UPON DIRECTION OF THE TRANSPORTATION OFFICER.

SECTION 303 OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949, 63 STAT. 813, 814, PROVIDES THAT, UNDER REGULATIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE SECRETARIES CONCERNED, MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES WHEN ORDERED TO MAKE A CHANGE OF STATION SHALL BE ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF THEIR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS. PARAGRAPH 8014-1, JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, IN EFFECT WHEN YOU SHIPPED YOUR EFFECTS, CLEARLY PROVIDED THAT SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS NOT AUTHORIZED PRIOR TO RECEIPT OF ORDERS. WHEN ORDERS FOR YOUR DISCHARGE WERE ISSUED, THAT PARAGRAPH HAD BEEN CHANGED, EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1, 1952, TO PROVIDE THAT THE SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS NOT AUTHORIZED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ORDERS EXCEPT IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, EXIGENCY OF THE SERVICE, OR WHEN REQUIRED BY SERVICE NECESSITY AS DETERMINED BY THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY OF THE SERVICE CONCERNED.

THUS, WHEN YOUR EFFECTS WERE SHIPPED, THERE WAS NO AUTHORITY OF LAW FOR SHIPMENT PRIOR TO ORDERS, AND THE SUBSEQUENT CHANGE IN THE REGULATIONS DOES NOT AFFORD A BASIS FOR ALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM INASMUCH AS THE SHIPMENT WAS FOR YOUR PERSONAL CONVENIENCE AND THERE WAS NO OFFICIAL DETERMINATION THAT SHIPMENT PRIOR TO ORDERS WAS REQUIRED BY AN EMERGENCY, EXIGENCY OF THE SERVICE, OR SERVICE NECESSITY. WHILE THE ENDORSEMENT OF MAY 1, 1952, AS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE, SUGGESTED SHIPMENT AT PERSONAL EXPENSE WITH CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT TO BE FILED LATER, IT AFFORDS NO LEGAL BASIS FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM.