B-127226, SEP. 14, 1956

B-127226: Sep 14, 1956

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

DROEGE: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 23. IN YOUR LETTER IT IS STATED BY YOU THAT: "THE SUMMARY OF THE SOLICITOR'S LETTER WHICH YOU QUOTE IS NOT ALL FACT: 1) THE FOURTH SENTENCE IS NOT CORRECT AS I RETURNED TO ST. WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT WHO WAS MY IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR AND WHO APPROVED MY ANNUAL LEAVE PRIOR TO DEPARTING FROM MY DUTY STATION. IS NOT NOW MATERIAL TO YOUR PRESENT CLAIM WHICH ARISES UNDER A LATER STATUTE. REFERRED TO BY YOU IS AN EXPRESSION OF YOUR OWN INTERPRETATION OF PUBLIC LAW 600. IT IS NOT A WRITTEN AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN YOU AND THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT FOR YOU TO RETURN AND SERVE A SPECIFIC PERIOD OF DUTY IN ALASKA. WHILE YOUR SUPERVISOR MAY HAVE HAD AUTHORITY TO GRANT ANNUAL LEAVE.

B-127226, SEP. 14, 1956

TO MR. D. A. DROEGE:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 23, 1956, FORWARDED TO OUR OFFICE BY REPRESENTATIVE BARTLETT, REQUESTING REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES INCURRED BY YOU INCIDENT TO TRAVEL TO THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES FOR THE PURPOSE OF TAKING ANNUAL LEAVE.

IN YOUR LETTER IT IS STATED BY YOU THAT:

"THE SUMMARY OF THE SOLICITOR'S LETTER WHICH YOU QUOTE IS NOT ALL FACT: 1) THE FOURTH SENTENCE IS NOT CORRECT AS I RETURNED TO ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI THE SUMMER OF 1950 ON APPROVED ANNUAL LEAVE. 2) I AGREED TO RETURN TO ALASKA TO SERVE ANOTHER TOUR OF DUTY PRIOR TO DEPARTING FROM ANCHORAGE. PLEASE REFER TO MY LETTER DATED DECEMBER 15, 1954, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT WHO WAS MY IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR AND WHO APPROVED MY ANNUAL LEAVE PRIOR TO DEPARTING FROM MY DUTY STATION. I DEPARTED ON LEAVE DECEMBER 21, 1954.'

THE FACT THAT YOU RETURNED TO THE UNITED STATES ON ANNUAL LEAVE AT YOUR OWN EXPENSE IN 1950, IS NOT NOW MATERIAL TO YOUR PRESENT CLAIM WHICH ARISES UNDER A LATER STATUTE.

THE LETTER OF DECEMBER 15, 1954, REFERRED TO BY YOU IS AN EXPRESSION OF YOUR OWN INTERPRETATION OF PUBLIC LAW 600, 60 STAT. 806, AS AMENDED, AND A REQUEST THAT THE MATTER BE FORWARDED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES TO OUR OFFICE FOR A RULING. IT IS NOT A WRITTEN AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN YOU AND THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT FOR YOU TO RETURN AND SERVE A SPECIFIC PERIOD OF DUTY IN ALASKA. THEREFORE, WHILE YOUR SUPERVISOR MAY HAVE HAD AUTHORITY TO GRANT ANNUAL LEAVE, THE QUESTION OF PAYING YOUR TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES TO THE UNITED STATES INCIDENT THERETO, WAS REFERRED THROUGH CHANNELS TO THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT IN WASHINGTON. THE DEPARTMENT ANSWERED THE QUESTION IN THE NEGATIVE.

THE ACT OF AUGUST 31, 1954, 68 STAT. 1008, 5 U.S.C. 1084, AS IMPLEMENTED BY REGULATIONS ISSUED BY THE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET ON MAY 2, 1955, EFFECTIVE AUGUST 31, 1954, UNDER WHICH YOUR CLAIM WAS CONSIDERED, PROVIDES THAT THE EXPENSES OF ROUND-TRIP TRAVEL OF EMPLOYEES AND TRANSPORTATION OF THEIR IMMEDIATE FAMILIES FROM POSTS OF DUTY OUTSIDE THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES TO THE PLACES OF ACTUAL RESIDENCES AT TIME OF APPOINTMENT OR TRANSFER TO SUCH OVERSEAS POSTS OF DUTY, SHALL BE ALLOWED IN THE CASE OF PERSONS WHO HAVE SATISFACTORILY COMPLETED AN AGREED PERIOD OF SERVICE OVERSEAS AND ARE RETURNING TO THEIR ACTUAL PLACES OF RESIDENCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF TAKING LEAVE PRIOR TO SERVING ANOTHER TOUR OF OVERSEAS DUTY UNDER A NEW WRITTEN AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BEFORE DEPARTING FROM THE OVERSEAS POST.

THERE IS NOTHING IN THE RECORD THAT WOULD INDICATE THAT YOUR ASSIGNMENT TO ALASKA EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 1949, WAS FOR ANY SPECIFIC PERIOD OF TIME OR THAT PRIOR TO DEPARTING FROM ALASKA IN DECEMBER 1954, FOR LEAVE IN THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES YOU ENTERED INTO A NEW WRITTEN AGREEMENT TO SERVE AN ADDITIONAL TOUR OF DUTY AS REQUIRED BY THE APPLICABLE LAW AND REGULATIONS. ON THE CONTRARY, THERE IS ON FILE AN ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT WHICH STATES THAT ALL TRANSFERS OF POSTAL EMPLOYEES FROM THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES TO THE TERRITORIES AND POSSESSIONS ARE ON A PERMANENT BASIS AND THE EMPLOYEES TRANSFERRED TO THE TERRITORIES UNDER THESE CONDITIONS DO NOT AGREE TO PERFORM DUTY FOR ANY FIXED PERIOD OF TIME AND EXECUTE NO AGREEMENT TO THAT EFFECT, WHICH WAS THE SITUATION IN YOUR CASE.

YOUR LETTER SETS FORTH NO FACTS OR EVIDENCE NOT HERETOFORE CONSIDERED AND SINCE, UPON REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT, THE APPLICATION OF THE LAW IS FOUND TO BE CORRECT, THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM WAS PROPER AND MUST BE SUSTAINED.