B-130790, APR. 9, 1957

B-130790: Apr 9, 1957

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

FOR A DECISION AS TO WHETHER PAYMENT IS AUTHORIZED TO FIRST LIEUTENANT CLARENCE R. OF WHICH THE CLAIMANT WAS A MEMBER. WERE ORDERED FROM THAT STATION TO ALASKA EFFECTIVE AUGUST 10. WHILE HE DID NOT HAVE A DEPENDENT UPON RECEIPT OF THE CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS. THE PLACE OF MARRIAGE IS NOT SHOWN. THAT IT OCCURRED WHEN HE WAS ON LEAVE AWAY FROM HIS STATION. HIS WIFE WAS LOCATED AT COLUMBIA. WAS MADE BY YOU ON VOUCHER 04632 IN YOUR OCTOBER 1956 ACCOUNTS. ADVISED YOU THAT THE MEMBER WAS AUTHORIZED TRAVEL OF HIS DEPENDENT FROM FORT LEWIS ONLY. DUE TO THE FACT THAT (1) DEPENDENT WAS NOT AUTHORIZED TO TRAVEL AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE TO FORT LEWIS. IF THE FIRST IS ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE. YOU WOULD LIKE TO BE INFORMED WHAT EFFECT IT WILL HAVE ON THE SECOND.

B-130790, APR. 9, 1957

TO LIEUTENANT COLOLEN J. L. WHIPPLE, FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY:

BY INDORSEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 18, 1957 (FINEK 300.8/10 NOV. 56 JTR), THE CHIEF OF FINANCE TRANSMITTED YOUR REQUEST OF DECEMBER 17, 1956, FOR A DECISION AS TO WHETHER PAYMENT IS AUTHORIZED TO FIRST LIEUTENANT CLARENCE R. WILLIAMS AS REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF HIS DEPENDENT FROM COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, TO FORT RICHARDSON, ALASKA, LESS THE AMOUNT ($6.72) PREVIOUSLY PAID.

BY MOVEMENT ORDER NO. 8, DATED APRIL 17, 1956, FORT LEWIS, WASHINGTON, CERTAIN UNITS OF THE SECOND INFANTRY DIVISION, OF WHICH THE CLAIMANT WAS A MEMBER, WERE ORDERED FROM THAT STATION TO ALASKA EFFECTIVE AUGUST 10, 1956. THE OFFICER MARRIED ON JUNE 23, 1956. THUS, WHILE HE DID NOT HAVE A DEPENDENT UPON RECEIPT OF THE CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS, IT SEEMS CLEAR THAT HE ACQUIRED ONE PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDERS. THE PLACE OF MARRIAGE IS NOT SHOWN. IT APPEARS, HOWEVER, THAT IT OCCURRED WHEN HE WAS ON LEAVE AWAY FROM HIS STATION. UPON HIS DEPARTURE FROM FORT LEWIS ON AUGUST 10, 1956, HIS WIFE WAS LOCATED AT COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, HAVING EITHER TRAVELED TO (AT PERSONAL EXPENSE) OR REMAINED AT, THAT PLACE FOLLOWING THEIR MARRIAGE. BY TRAVEL AUTHORIZATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, TO RICHARDSON, ALASKA. WHILE THE AUTHORIZATION CONTAINED THE STANDARD PROVISION THAT REIMBURSEMENT WOULD BE AUTHORIZED FROM "ABOVE ADDRESS, TO PORT OF EMBARKATION IN THE UNITED STATES, IT FURTHER INCLUDED THE SPECIFIC PROVISION ,REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL AUTHORIZED FOR DISTANCE NOT TO EXCEED FORT LEWIS, WASHINGTON.'

THE MEMBER'S WIFE TRAVELED FROM COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, TO FORT RICHARDSON, ALASKA, SEPTEMBER 29 AND 30, 1956, APPARENTLY BY AIR. PAYMENT IN THE SUM OF $6.72 REPRESENTING REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL FROM FORT LEWIS TO SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, AND FROM PORT OF WHITTIER TO FORT RICHARDSON, ALASKA, WAS MADE BY YOU ON VOUCHER 04632 IN YOUR OCTOBER 1956 ACCOUNTS. YOU STATE THAT THE TRANSPORTATION OFFICER, UNITED STATES ARMY, ALASKA, ADVISED YOU THAT THE MEMBER WAS AUTHORIZED TRAVEL OF HIS DEPENDENT FROM FORT LEWIS ONLY, DUE TO THE FACT THAT (1) DEPENDENT WAS NOT AUTHORIZED TO TRAVEL AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE TO FORT LEWIS, AND (2) DEPENDENT DID NOT TRAVEL TO THE DESIGNATED LOCATION (COLUMBIA) AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE. YOU PRESENT TWO QUESTIONS, AND STATE, IF THE FIRST IS ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE, YOU WOULD LIKE TO BE INFORMED WHAT EFFECT IT WILL HAVE ON THE SECOND.

PARAGRAPH 7008-3, JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, PROVIDES THAT WHEN DEPENDENTS ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO TRAVEL TO THE MEMBER'S NEW PERMANENT STATION OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES AT THE TIME THE MEMBER DEPARTS FROM HIS OLD DUTY STATION, TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS AUTHORIZED "FROM THE PLACE AND DEPENDENTS ARE LOCATED UPON RECEIPT OF THE CHANGE OF STATION ERS," NOT TO EXCEED THE COST FROM THE MEMBER'S OLD PERMANENT STATION TO ANY PLACE IN THE UNITED STATES THE MEMBER MAY DESIGNATE, AND SUBSEQUENTLY FROM SUCH DESIGNATED PLACE TO THE MEMBER'S CURRENT DUTY STATION. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE MEMBER DID NOT HAVE A DEPENDENT WHEN HE RECEIVED THE ORDERS AND, THEREFORE, DID NOT BECOME ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR ONE TO A DESIGNATED PLACE. SINCE HE DID, HOWEVER, HAVE A DEPENDENT PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDERS HE BECAME ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION (OR REIMBURSEMENT) FOR HER TRAVEL FROM THE OLD STATION TO THE NEW AS INDICATED IN THE TRAVEL AUTHORIZATION. SINCE HE HAS BEEN REIMBURSED FOR HIS WIFE'S TRAVEL ON THAT BASIS NO ADDITIONAL AMOUNT IS DUE. ACCORDINGLY, THE VOUCHER AND SUPPORTING PAPERS WILL BE RETAINED HERE. SINCE YOUR SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, DESIGNATED 1 AND 2, DO NOT APPEAR TO BE BASED ON A SITUATION SUCH AS IS HERE INVOLVED, WE ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO RENDER A DECISION ON THEM. SEE 22 COMP. GEN. 588, AND 21 ID. 83.