B-130175, FEB. 1, 1957

B-130175: Feb 1, 1957

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

042173: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 16. YOU WERE RELEASED FROM DUTY AT WASHINGTON. YOU HAVE CERTIFIED THAT YOUR WIFE TRAVELED AT PERSONAL EXPENSE FROM ASHVILLE. YOU WERE PAID FOR THE TRAVEL OF YOUR WIFE TO SAN FRANCISCO. THAT PART OF YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR HER TRAVEL FROM SAN FRANCISCO TO JAPAN WAS DISALLOWED ON THE BASIS THAT GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION FOR SUCH TRAVEL WAS AVAILABLE. IN YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THAT SETTLEMENT YOU SAY THAT YOUR WIFE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN FURNISHED GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION TO JAPAN. THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES IS CONTAINED IN SECTION 303 (C) OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949.

B-130175, FEB. 1, 1957

TO COLONEL BENJAMIN M. AYARS, 042173:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 16, 1956, AND ENCLOSURE, REQUESTING REVIEW OF THAT PART OF SETTLEMENT DATED JUNE 17, 1955, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF YOUR DEPENDENT (WIFE) FROM SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, TO YOKOHAMA, JAPAN.

BY ORDERS DATED AUGUST 21, OCTOBER 29, AND NOVEMBER 2, 1951, YOU WERE RELEASED FROM DUTY AT WASHINGTON, D.C., AND ASSIGNED TO DUTY IN THE FAR EAST. SUCH ORDERS MADE NO PROVISION FOR TRAVEL OF YOUR DEPENDENT TO YOUR OVERSEAS STATION. YOU HAVE CERTIFIED THAT YOUR WIFE TRAVELED AT PERSONAL EXPENSE FROM ASHVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, TO SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, BETWEEN JANUARY 8 AND 13, 1952. SHE THEN TRAVELED BY COMMERCIAL VESSEL TO JAPAN BETWEEN JANUARY 26 AND FEBRUARY 13, 1952. BY SETTLEMENT DATED JUNE 17, 1955, YOU WERE PAID FOR THE TRAVEL OF YOUR WIFE TO SAN FRANCISCO, BUT THAT PART OF YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR HER TRAVEL FROM SAN FRANCISCO TO JAPAN WAS DISALLOWED ON THE BASIS THAT GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION FOR SUCH TRAVEL WAS AVAILABLE. IN YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THAT SETTLEMENT YOU SAY THAT YOUR WIFE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN FURNISHED GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION TO JAPAN, CITING CINCFE MESSAGE DATED NOVEMBER 20, 1951.

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES IS CONTAINED IN SECTION 303 (C) OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949, 63 STAT. 814, WHICH EXPRESSLY PROVIDES THAT TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE UPON A MEMBER'S ORDERED CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION SHALL BE UNDER SUCH CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, FOR SUCH RANKS, GRADES OR RATINGS, AND TO AND FROM SUCH LOCATIONS AS THE SECRETARIES CONCERNED MAY PRESCRIBE.

CHAPTER 7, JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, ISSUED BY THE SECRETARIES TO IMPLEMENT THIS STATUTORY AUTHORITY, PROVIDES GENERALLY IN PARAGRAPH 7000 THAT MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES (EXCEPT ENLISTED MEN IN THE LOWER PAY GRADES) ARE ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE UPON A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED FROM THE OLD PERMANENT STATION TO THE NEW PERMANENT STATION OR BETWEEN POINTS OTHERWISE AUTHORIZED IN SUCH REGULATIONS.

THE RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OF MILITARY PERSONNEL AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE UPON AN ORDERED CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION IS NOT AN ABSOLUTE ONE BUT MAY BE ADMINISTRATIVELY SUSPENDED OR DENIED FOR REASONS OF MILITARY NECESSITY OR EXPEDIENCY, IN WHICH EVENT AN OFFICER MAY NOT TRANSPORT HIS DEPENDENTS TO HIS NEW STATION AT PERSONAL EXPENSE AND BE REIMBURSED FOR THE TRAVEL SO PERFORMED IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROHIBITION. CULP V. UNITED STATES, 76 C.CLS. 507. SEE 35 COMP. GEN. 61.

TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS TO OVERSEAS STATIONS TO WHICH, IN GENERAL, COORDINATED TRAVEL OF A MEMBER AND HIS DEPENDENTS WAS NOT AUTHORIZED AT THE TIME INVOLVED, WAS GOVERNED INSOFAR AS ARMY PERSONNEL WERE CONCERNED, BY A PRIORITY SYSTEM AS PUBLISHED IN SPECIAL REGULATIONS NO. 55-765-5. THOSE REGULATIONS, ISSUED BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY, WERE INTENDED TO PROVIDE A FAIR AND EQUITABLE MEANS OF REUNITING FAMILIES SEPARATED BY OVERSEAS SERVICE AND TO INSURE THAT HOUSING IN THE OVERSEAS COMMAND, AND TRANSPORTATION TO SUCH COMMAND, WOULD BE AVAILABLE FIRST TO THOSE FAMILIES SUFFERING THE GREATER PERIOD OF SEPARATION. THE EFFECT OF THOSE REGULATIONS--- WHERE A MEMBER WAS ORDERED TO AN OVERSEAS COMMAND OPERATING UNDER THE PRIORITY SYSTEM--- WAS TO LIMIT HIS RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS, NOTWITHSTANDING THE ORDERED PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THEIR PRESENCE AT HIS DUTY STATION WAS AUTHORIZED BY THE OVERSEAS COMMANDER CONCERNED, AND ORDERS FOR THEIR TRAVEL WERE ISSUED.

SINCE YOUR WIFE TRAVELED FROM SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, TO JAPAN, A RESTRICTED AREA OPERATING UNDER THE PRIORITY SYSTEM, WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION OR TRAVEL ORDERS, THERE IS NO LEGAL BASIS FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR HER TRAVEL BETWEEN THOSE PLACES. ACCORDINGLY, THE DISALLOWANCE OF THAT PART OF YOUR CLAIM BY THE SETTLEMENT OF JUNE 17, 1955, IS SUSTAINED ON THE BASIS SET FORTH ABOVE.