B-135810, APR. 30, 1958

B-135810: Apr 30, 1958

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

VONDERHEIDE: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 2. YOU HAVE NOT FURNISHED COPIES OF THE ORDERS UNDER WHICH THE DUTY WAS PERFORMED. THAT WHILE YOU WERE SERVING ON TEMPORARY DUTY AT FORT MCCLELLAN THERE WAS ISSUED SPECIAL ORDER NO. 209. YOU WERE PAID PER DIEM FOR TEMPORARY DUTY TO THAT DATE. APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN TAKEN FOR THE REASON THAT FORT MCCLELLAN WAS IN FACT YOUR PERMANENT STATION AFTER THE RECEIPT OF THE ORDERS OF OCTOBER 22. YOU CONTEND THAT THE PAYMENT OF PER DIEM WAS JUSTIFIED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH 4209 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. A COPY OF THAT DECISION APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN FURNISHED TO YOU. THE MATTER OF YOUR INDEBTEDNESS IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE CASE OF FIRST LIEUTENANT HUGH E.

B-135810, APR. 30, 1958

TO MR. BERNARD L. VONDERHEIDE:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 2, 1957, WITH ENCLOSURES, AND TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 8, 1958, CONCERNING YOUR INDEBTEDNESS IN THE AMOUNT OF $41.25 ON ACCOUNT OF PER DIEM PAID INCIDENT TO YOUR SERVICE IN THE ARMY WHILE STATIONED AT FORT MCCLELLAN, ALABAMA.

THE MATTER OF YOUR INDEBTEDNESS HAS NOT BEEN REPORTED TO US FOR COLLECTION ACTION, BUT IT APPEARS FROM YOUR LETTERS AND ENCLOSURES THAT DEMAND FOR REFUND OF THE AMOUNT INVOLVED HAS BEEN MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY AS A RESULT OF AN AUDIT EXCEPTION IN THE DISBURSING OFFICER'S ACCOUNT BECAUSE OF THE ERRONEOUS PAYMENT. YOU HAVE NOT FURNISHED COPIES OF THE ORDERS UNDER WHICH THE DUTY WAS PERFORMED, BUT IT APPEARS FROM THE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED JANUARY 4, 1957, TO YOU FROM THE ARMY FINANCE CENTER, THAT WHILE YOU WERE SERVING ON TEMPORARY DUTY AT FORT MCCLELLAN THERE WAS ISSUED SPECIAL ORDER NO. 209, DATED OCTOBER 22, 1954, WHICH ASSIGNED YOU TO PERMANENT DUTY AT THAT STATION. APPARENTLY THE ORDER SPECIFIED AN EFFECTIVE DATE AFTER NOVEMBER 18, 1954, AND YOU WERE PAID PER DIEM FOR TEMPORARY DUTY TO THAT DATE. AN AUDIT EXCEPTION TO THE PAYMENT FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 25 TO NOVEMBER 18, 1954, APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN TAKEN FOR THE REASON THAT FORT MCCLELLAN WAS IN FACT YOUR PERMANENT STATION AFTER THE RECEIPT OF THE ORDERS OF OCTOBER 22, 1954.

YOU CONTEND THAT THE PAYMENT OF PER DIEM WAS JUSTIFIED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH 4209 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, IN EFFECT AT THE TIME, AND THAT REFUND SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED ON THE BASIS OF OUR SUBSEQUENT DECISION OF JUNE 8, 1955, B-122508, TO THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE. A COPY OF THAT DECISION APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN FURNISHED TO YOU.

THE MATTER OF YOUR INDEBTEDNESS IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE CASE OF FIRST LIEUTENANT HUGH E. REYNOLDS, JR., WHICH WAS CONSIDERED IN OUR DECISION OF JANUARY 8, 1957, B-130025, A COPY OF WHICH IS ENCLOSED. THE PERTINENT STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND REGULATIONS, AS WELL AS THE APPLICABILITY OF OUR DECISION OF JUNE 8, 1955, TO PERIODS PRIOR THERETO, WERE THEN CAREFULLY CONSIDERED. FOR THE REASONS STATED, IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT WHERE A MEMBER RECEIVES ORDERS AT HIS TEMPORARY DUTY STATION DESIGNATING THAT STATION AS HIS PERMANENT STATION, A PROVISION IN THE ORDERS PURPORTING TO POSTPONE THE EFFECTIVE DATE MAY NOT OPERATE TO PERMIT HIM TO RECEIVE PER DIEM FOR DUTY DESIGNATED AS TEMPORARY DUTY BUT PERFORMED AT HIS DESIGNATED POST OF DUTY. ALSO IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THE DECISION OF JUNE 8, 1955, DID NOT ANNOUNCE A NEW RULE AND, HENCE, WAS APPLICABLE TO A PERIOD PRIOR THERETO. WHAT WAS SAID IN THE DECISION TO LIEUTENANT REYNOLDS APPEARS TO BE EQUALLY APPLICABLE IN YOUR CASE. HENCE, THE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION TAKEN TO RECOVER THE AMOUNT INVOLVED WAS PROPER.

THE DELAY IN ANSWERING YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 2, 1957, RESULTING FROM THE LETTER HAVING BEEN ERRONEOUSLY FILED, IS REGRETTED.