B-136166, JUL. 16, 1958

B-136166: Jul 16, 1958

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

478 21 07: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 14. WHILE YOU WERE PERFORMING TEMPORARY ADDITIONAL DUTY IN MANILA. FOR A PERIOD OF TEMPORARY ADDITIONAL DUTY OF APPROXIMATELY 60 DAYS UPON THE COMPLETION OF WHICH YOU WERE TO RETURN TO YOUR DUTY STATION. THE DISBURSING OFFICER WAS AUTHORIZED TO CREDIT YOU WITH STATION PER DIEM ALLOWANCE AT MANILA RATES FOR THE PERIOD INVOLVED. IT WAS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED THAT NO EXPENSE TO THE GOVERNMENT WAS AUTHORIZED IN CONNECTION WITH THE ORDERS. YOU WERE INSTRUCTED THAT "IN CASE YOU DO NOT DESIRE TO BEAR THE EXPENSE YOU WILL REGARD THIS AUTHORIZATION REVOKED.'. THE TEMPORARY DUTY THERE WAS COMPLETED ON DECEMBER 10. PROVIDED FOR THE MODIFICATION OF SUCH BASIC ORDERS TO PROVIDE THAT TRAVEL VIA GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION WAS AUTHORIZED AND DIRECTED AND TO INDICATE THAT FUNDS FOR THE PAYMENT OF PER DIEM FOR TEMPORARY DUTY PERFORMED UNDER THE ORDERS WERE AVAILABLE.

B-136166, JUL. 16, 1958

TO JOHN L. GRAHAM, YN 2, USN, 478 21 07:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 14, 1958, FORWARDED HERE BY THE COMMANDING OFFICER, U.S. NAVAL STATION, SANGLEY POINT, PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, VIA THE COMPTROLLER OF THE NAVY, REQUESTING REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF JANUARY 6, 1958, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR PER DIEM COVERING THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 5 TO DECEMBER 10, 1956, WHILE YOU WERE PERFORMING TEMPORARY ADDITIONAL DUTY IN MANILA, P.I. ORDERS SER T-154, UNITED STATES NAVAL STATION, SANGLEY POINT, DATED SEPTEMBER 4, 1956, PROVIDED THAT YOU SHOULD PROCEED ON OR ABOUT SEPTEMBER 4, 1956, WHEN DIRECTED BY PROPER AUTHORITY, TO THE UNITED STATES EMBASSY, MANILA, FOR A PERIOD OF TEMPORARY ADDITIONAL DUTY OF APPROXIMATELY 60 DAYS UPON THE COMPLETION OF WHICH YOU WERE TO RETURN TO YOUR DUTY STATION. THE DISBURSING OFFICER WAS AUTHORIZED TO CREDIT YOU WITH STATION PER DIEM ALLOWANCE AT MANILA RATES FOR THE PERIOD INVOLVED, BUT IT WAS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED THAT NO EXPENSE TO THE GOVERNMENT WAS AUTHORIZED IN CONNECTION WITH THE ORDERS, AND YOU WERE INSTRUCTED THAT "IN CASE YOU DO NOT DESIRE TO BEAR THE EXPENSE YOU WILL REGARD THIS AUTHORIZATION REVOKED.' YOU LEFT SANGLEY POINT UNDER THOSE ORDERS ON SEPTEMBER 4 AND REPORTED AT THE AMERICAN EMBASSY IN MANILA ON SEPTEMBER 5. THE TEMPORARY DUTY THERE WAS COMPLETED ON DECEMBER 10, 1956, AND YOU RETURNED TO YOUR STATION AT SANGLEY POINT ON THAT DATE. INDORSEMENT OF THE COMMANDING OFFICER, U.S. NAVAL STATION, SANGLEY POINT, DATED OCTOBER 22, 1957, TO YOUR BASIC ORDERS OF SEPTEMBER 4, 1956, PROVIDED FOR THE MODIFICATION OF SUCH BASIC ORDERS TO PROVIDE THAT TRAVEL VIA GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION WAS AUTHORIZED AND DIRECTED AND TO INDICATE THAT FUNDS FOR THE PAYMENT OF PER DIEM FOR TEMPORARY DUTY PERFORMED UNDER THE ORDERS WERE AVAILABLE. THERE IS NO SUGGESTION IN THE INDORSEMENT THAT THE PERMISSIVE NATURE OF THE BASIC ORDERS RESULTED BECAUSE OF AN ERRONEOUS MISSTATEMENT OF THE INTENTION OF THE AUTHORITY ISSUING THOSE ORDERS.

THE PERFORMANCE OF PUBLIC BUSINESS BY DIRECTION OF COMPETENT ORDERS IS THE BASIS OF AUTHORITY FOR THE PAYMENT OF TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 303 (A) OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949, 63 STAT. 813, AND PARAGRAPH 3050 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. IN CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THE PERFORMANCE OF TRAVEL IS CONSIDERED BENEFICIAL TO THE SERVICE BUT NOT TO THE EXTENT THAT PUBLIC BUSINESS IS INVOLVED, IT HAS BEEN THE PRACTICE OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICE TO ISSUE AUTHORIZATION-TYPE ORDERS PERMITTING THE PERFORMANCE OF TRAVEL PROVIDING THE TRAVELER IS AGREEABLE TO ASSUMING ITS COSTS. TRAVEL OF THAT TYPE, PERFORMED AT THE OPTION OF THE MEMBER, IS NOT CONSIDERED TO BE ON PUBLIC BUSINESS BY DIRECTION OF COMPETENT ORDERS WITHIN THE CONTEMPLATION OF THE LAW AND REGULATIONS. SEE, IN THAT CONNECTION, PARAGRAPH 6453 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS WHICH PROVIDES "AN ORDER PERMITTING A MEMBER TO TRAVEL AS DISTINGUISHED FROM DIRECTING A MEMBER TO TRAVEL DOES NOT ENTITLE HIM TO EXPENSES OF TRAVEL.'

YOUR ORDERS OF SEPTEMBER 4, 1956, AUTHORIZED YOUR TRAVEL TO MANILA AND THE PERFORMANCE OF TEMPORARY DUTY THERE AT YOUR OPTION PROVIDED YOU WOULD ASSUME THE EXPENSES INVOLVED. OTHERWISE, THE AUTHORIZATION STOOD REVOKED. SUCH ORDERS PRESUMABLY WERE ISSUED ON THE BASIS OF A DETERMINATION THAT OFFICIAL BUSINESS WAS NOT PRIMARILY INVOLVED. NOTHING IN THE MODIFYING INDORSEMENT OF OCTOBER 22, 1957, IF OTHERWISE ACCEPTABLE TO RETROACTIVELY MODIFY THE ORDERS, APPEARS TO HAVE OVERCOME AND DISPROVED THE INITIAL DETERMINATION OF A LACK OF OFFICIAL BUSINESS WHICH PROMPTED THE ISSUANCE OF THE AUTHORIZATION-TYPE ORDERS. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS CONCLUDED THAT NO AUTHORITY EXISTS FOR THE PAYMENT OF YOUR CLAIM.