B-13922, JANUARY 13, 1941, 20 COMP. GEN. 363

B-13922: Jan 13, 1941

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

TRANSPORTATION - DEPENDENTS - FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION A NAVAL OFFICER IS NOT ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM HIS HOME. WHICH IS NOT A PERMANENT STATION. - AND THIS RULE IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE ASSIGNMENT OF TEMPORARY DUTY INTERVENING BETWEEN DEPARTURE FROM HIS HOME AND ASSIGNMENT TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT/DUTY STATION. 10 COMP. 1941: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 9. IN THE CASE OF AN OFFICER APPOINTED IN THE MEDICAL CORPS OF THE REGULAR ARMY FROM CIVIL LIFE WHO WAS ASSIGNED A TEMPORARY STATION. IT WAS HELD HE WAS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM HIS FORMER MILITARY (TEMPORARY) STATION TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT STATION UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE ACT OF MAY 18.

B-13922, JANUARY 13, 1941, 20 COMP. GEN. 363

TRANSPORTATION - DEPENDENTS - FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION A NAVAL OFFICER IS NOT ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM HIS HOME, WHICH IS NOT A PERMANENT STATION, TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT/DUTY STATION--- WHETHER A RESERVE OFFICER OR A RETIRED OFFICER--- AND THIS RULE IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE ASSIGNMENT OF TEMPORARY DUTY INTERVENING BETWEEN DEPARTURE FROM HIS HOME AND ASSIGNMENT TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT/DUTY STATION. 10 COMP. GEN. 122, DISTINGUISHED.

ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL ELLIOTT TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, JANUARY 13, 1941:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 9, 1940, FORWARDING THE CLAIM IN LIEUTENANT ( JR. GR.) HOWARD C. PIEPER, MC-V (G), U.S. NAVAL RESERVE, FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST OF TRAVEL OF HIS DEPENDENT (WIFE) FROM PENSACOLA, FLA., TO GLENVIEW, ILL., UNDER THE CONDITIONS EXISTING IN HIS CASE AS HEREINAFTER STATED. WITH THIS CLAIM YOU TRANSMIT A LETTER OF NOVEMBER 13, 1940, FROM THE CHIEF OF THE BUREAU OF NAVIGATION, WHO REFERS TO A DECISION OF THE FORMER COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, SEPTEMBER 12, 1930, A-33298, 10 COMP. GEN. 122, IN THE CASE OF AN OFFICER APPOINTED IN THE MEDICAL CORPS OF THE REGULAR ARMY FROM CIVIL LIFE WHO WAS ASSIGNED A TEMPORARY STATION, AND THEREAFTER ASSIGNED A PERMANENT STATION, AND IT WAS HELD HE WAS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM HIS FORMER MILITARY (TEMPORARY) STATION TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT STATION UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1920, 41 STAT. 604. THE CHIEF OF THE BUREAU OF NAVIGATION SUGGESTS THAT SAID DECISION MAY BE APPLICABLE TO THE CLAIM OF LIEUTENANT PIEPER, AND YOU HAVE REQUESTED DECISION ON THE QUESTIONS PRESENTED BY THE CHIEF OF THE BUREAU OF NAVIGATION IN PARAGRAPHS 7 AND 8 OF HIS LETTER. THOSE PARAGRAPHS ARE AS FOLLOWS:

7. IN VIEW OF THE APPARENT CONFLICTING PROVISIONS OF THE VARIOUS DECISIONS, IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE ATTACHED CLAIM BE REFERRED TO THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL FOR DECISION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE RULING MADE IN DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 12, 1930, APPLIES ONLY TO OFFICERS ON RECEIVING COMMISSION AND ASSIGNMENT TO FIRST DUTY, OR WHETHER IT MAY ALSO BE APPLIED TO OFFICERS ON THE RETIRED LIST AND NAVAL RESERVE OFFICERS CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY, FIRST ASSIGNED A TEMPORARY DUTY STATION, AND SUBSEQUENTLY ASSIGNED A PERMANENT DUTY STATION.

8. IF A DECISION IS RENDERED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, INFORMATION IS REQUESTED AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IT WILL APPLY ONLY TO ORIGINAL COMMISSIONS, CALLS TO ACTIVE DUTY OF BOTH RETIRED AND RESERVE OFFICERS, OR WHETHER IT MAY ALSO BE APPLIED TO OFFICERS AND MEN OF THE REGULAR NAVY ORDERED FROM A TEMPORARY STATION TO A PERMANENT/DUTY STATION, THE DEPENDENTS HAVING PROCEEDED TO THE TEMPORARY STATION AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE.

SECTION 12 OF THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1920, 41 STAT. 604, 34 U.S.C. 896 (SEE, ALSO, SEC. 896-B), PROVIDES:

THAT HEREAFTER WHEN ANY COMMISSIONED OFFICER * * * HAVING A WIFE OR DEPENDENT CHILD OR CHILDREN IS ORDERED TO MAKE A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, FOR THE UNITED STATES SHALL FURNISH TRANSPORTATION IN KIND FROM FUNDS APPROPRIATED FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE ARMY, THE NAVY, THE MARINE CORPS * * * TO HIS NEW STATION FOR THE WIFE AND DEPENDENT CHILD OR CHILDREN: * * *

IN 27 COMP. DEC. 61 AND 391 IT WAS HELD, ON THE AUTHORITY OF UNITED STATES V. PHISTERER, 94 U.S. 219, 222, THAT AN OFFICER ON RETIREMENT AND A RETIRED OFFICER RECALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY WAS NOT ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM HIS LAST STATION TO HIS HOME OR FROM HIS HOME TO HIS FIRST STATION ON ASSIGNMENT TO ACTIVE DUTY, HIS HOME NOT BEING A MILITARY STATION. THESE DECISIONS HAVE NOT BEEN MODIFIED, BUT SECTION 3 OF THE NAVAL APPROPRIATION ACT OF JUNE 24, 1935, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1936, 49 STAT. 421, HAS HAD THE EFFECT OF MODIFYING THE FIRST OF THE CITED DECISIONS, SAID ACT PROVIDING THAT THE WORDS "PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION" AS USED IN SECTION 12 OF THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1920, SHALL BE HELD TO INCLUDE THE HOME OF AN OFFICER OR MAN TO WHICH HE IS ORDERED IN CONNECTION WITH RETIREMENT. THAT PROVISION GOES NO FURTHER THAN ITS PLAIN LANGUAGE IMPORTS AND THE WORDS "PERMANENT STATION" AS USED IN THE ACT OF 1920 DO NOT, THEREFORE, INCLUDE THE HOME OF AN OFFICER EXCEPT WHERE HE IS ORDERED THERETO IN CONNECTION WITH HIS RETIREMENT.

IN THE CITED CASE OF SEPTEMBER 12, 1930, 10 COMP. GEN. 122, IT WILL BE OBSERVED THAT THE OFFICER, BEFORE HE HAD REPORTED AT HIS FIRST "PERMANENT" STATION IN THE MILITARY SERVICE, WAS TRAVELING FROM A MILITARY STATION TO WHICH HE HAD BEEN TEMPORARILY ASSIGNED TO HIS FIRST STATION DESIGNATED AS PERMANENT. THE CASE CAN HAVE NO APPLICATION TO OFFICERS OF THE REGULAR ESTABLISHMENT WHO NORMALLY HAVE A PERMANENT STATION FROM WHICH THEY ARE DETACHED UPON ASSIGNMENT TO ANOTHER PERMANENT STATION, NOTWITHSTANDING THERE MAY BE INTERVENING TEMPORARY DUTY. IT WAS HELD IN 27 COMP. DEC. 400 THAT AN OFFICER WAS NOT ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS TO A TEMPORARY STATION, EVEN THOUGH SUBSEQUENTLY THE TEMPORARY STATION WAS MADE HIS PERMANENT STATION. SEE ALSO, 2 COMP. GEN. 464; 3 ID. 585, AND FOR A QUALIFICATION OF THIS RULE 7 COMP. GEN. 664. THESE DECISIONS HAVE NOT BEEN MODIFIED. SO THAT IT IS NOT PERCEIVED THAT IN ANY CASE THE DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 12, 1930, HAS ANY APPLICATION TO OFFICERS OF THE REGULAR NAVY WHO, IT IS SAID, HAVE NOT BEEN ASSIGNED A PERMANENT STATION AND WHO THEREAFTER ARE ORDERED FROM A TEMPORARY STATION TO A PERMANENT STATION, AS IN ALL CASES SUCH OFFICERS HAVE HAD A PERMANENT STATION FROM WHICH WOULD BE COMPUTED ANY TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS TO A SUBSEQUENT PERMANENT STATION, EVEN THOUGH BETWEEN DETACHMENT FROM ONE AND ASSIGNMENT TO THE OTHER THE OFFICER WERE ASSIGNED TO INTERVENING TEMPORARY DUTY.

THE ORDERS OF SEPTEMBER 11, 1940, TO LIEUTENANT PIEPER ARE AS FOLLOWS:

FROM: THE CHIEF OF THE BUREAU OF NAVIGATION.

TO: LIEUT. (JG) HOWARD C. PIEPER, MC-V (G), USNV., NAVAL AIR STATION, PENSACOLA, FLORIDA.

VIA: THE COMMANDANT.

SUBJECT: CHANGE OF STATION.

REFERENCES: (A) BUNAV ORDERS NAV-1614-AMW 78001 DATED JUNE 27, 1940.

(B) BUM AND S FIRST ENDORSEMENT H-B-LUW DATED SEPTEMBER 10, 1940.

1. WHEN DIRECTED BY THE COMMANDANT, NAVAL AIR STATION, ON OR ABOUT SEPTEMBER 13, 1940, YOU WILL CONSIDER YOURSELF DETACHED FROM SUCH DUTY AS YOU MAY BE PERFORMING UNDER REFERENCE (A) ( BUNAV ORDERS NAV-1614 AMW 78001 DATED JUNE 27, 1940). YOU WILL PROCEED TO CHICAGO ( GLENVIEW), ILLINOIS, AND REPORT TO THE COMMANDING OFFICER, NAVAL RESERVE AVIATION BASE, FOR ACTIVE DUTY, REPORTING BY LETTER TO THE COMMANDANT, NINTH NAVAL DISTRICT.

2. YOU ARE AUTHORIZED FIVE DAYS' DELAY IN REPORTING FOR THIS DUTY, SUCH DELAY TO COUNT AS LEAVE.

3. PAY AND ALLOWANCES, INCLUDING TRAVEL EXPENSE UNDER THESE ORDERS, WILL CONTINUE AS A CHARGE AGAINST APPROPRIATION," PAY, SUBSISTENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION OF NAVAL PERSONNEL.'

BY ORDERS OF SEPTEMBER 17, 1940, PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE ABOVE ORDERS WAS AMENDED TO AUTHORIZE AN ADDITIONAL 15 DAYS' DELAY IN REPORTING AT GLENVIEW, ILL., "FOR ACTIVE DUTY; SUCH DELAY TO COUNT AS LEAVE WITHOUT PAY.' AS TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OF OFFICERS OF COMPONENTS OF THE REGULAR MILITARY OR NAVAL SERVICE ONLY TEMPORARILY IN THE ACTIVE SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES, IT HAS BEEN HELD THE PROVISION FOR TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS WAS NOT APPLICABLE. SEE 1 COMP. GEN. 637, AS TO THE NATIONAL GUARD. PARAGRAPH 3 OF LIEUTENANT PIEPER'S ORDERS DIRECTS THAT HIS PAY AND ALLOWANCES WILL CONTINUE AS A CHARGE AGAINST THE APPROPRIATION " PAY, SUBSISTENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION OF NAVAL PERSONNEL.' THE APPROPRIATION UNDER THAT HEAD FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1941, ACT OF JUNE 11, 1940, PUBLIC, NO. 588, CONTAINS A PROVISION THAT IT SHALL BE AVAILABLE FOR "MEMBERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE WHEN CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY IN TIME OF WAR OR DURING THE EXISTENCE OF A NATIONAL EMERGENCY DECLARED BY THE PRESIDENT.' THIS REFERENCE IN HIS ORDERS TO THE APPROPRIATION CHARGEABLE WITH HIS PAY AND ALLOWANCES IS UNDERSTOOD TO INDICATE THAT HIS ORIGINAL ORDERS (A COPY OF WHICH WAS NOT ENCLOSED) INDICATE THAT HE WAS CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY UNDER AUTHORITY OF THE ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF SEPTEMBER 8, 1939, DECLARING A LIMITED NATIONAL EMERGENCY. SEE ALSO, IN THIS CONNECTION, PUBLIC RESOLUTION NO. 96 OF AUGUST 27, 1940. WHILE, AS STATED ABOVE, IT WAS HELD THAT TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS WAS NOT AUTHORIZED FOR MEMBERS OF THE RESERVE COMPONENTS OF THE REGULAR MILITARY OR NAVAL SERVICES WHEN ON ACTIVE DUTY FOR SHORT PERIODS, SUCH TRANSPORTATION HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED BY THE ARMY APPROPRIATION ACTS FOR RESERVE OFFICERS OF THE ARMY FOR SOME YEARS. SEE THE PROVISION UNDER " ORGANIZED RESERVES" IN THE ARMY APPROPRIATION ACT OF JUNE 11, 1938, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1939, 52 STAT. 642, 662. ARTICLE H-7108, BUREAU OF NAVIGATION MANUAL, PROVIDES:

(1) ORDERS TO TRAINING DUTY OR TO TEMPORARY ACTIVE DUTY DO NOT ENTITLE MEMBERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS.

(2) ORDERS TO ACTIVE DUTY DO NOT ENTITLE MEMBERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM THEIR HOMES TO FIRST PERMANENT/DUTY STATIONS OR FROM LAST PERMANENT STATIONS TO THEIR HOMES UPON RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY. WHEN SUCH RESERVISTS ARE SERVING UNDER ORDERS TO EXTENDED OR INDEFINITE PERIODS OF ACTIVE DUTY IN EXCESS OF 6 MONTHS, THEY ARE ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS UPON PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION.

IT IS NOT CLEAR THAT TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS OF NAVAL RESERVE OFFICERS IS PROVIDED FOR BY THE NAVAL RESERVE LAW OF 1938. SECTION 7 OF THAT LAW, ACT OF JUNE 25, 1938, 52 STAT. 1176 (WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE AMENDMENT, WHICH IS IMMATERIAL HERE, MADE IN THIS SECTION BY SECTION 8 OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 27, 1940, PUBLIC, NO. 775) PROVIDES:

SEC. 7. COMMISSIONED OFFICERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE, INCLUDING THOSE ON THE HONORARY RETIRED LIST OR WHO MAY HAVE BEEN RETIRED, WHEN EMPLOYED ON ACTIVE DUTY OR ON TRAINING DUTY WITH PAY OR WHEN EMPLOYED IN AUTHORIZED TRAVEL TO AND FROM SUCH DUTY SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED IN GRADE AND QUALIFIED FOR ALL GENERAL SERVICE AND SHALL RECEIVE THE PAY AND ALLOWANCES, INCLUDING LONGEVITY PAY, AS PROVIDED BY LAW FOR THE RESERVE FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES, AND SHALL WHEN TRAVELING UNDER ORDERS OR UNDER COMPETENT AUTHORITY RECEIVE TRANSPORTATION IN KIND, MILEAGE, OR ACTUAL EXPENSES AS PROVIDED BY LAW FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED BY OFFICERS OF THE REGULAR NAVY. * * *

WHILE THE APPROPRIATION " PAY, SUBSISTENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION OF NAVAL PERSONNEL" IS AVAILABLE FOR TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AS AUTHORIZED BY PERMANENT LAW, THE PERMANENT LAW FOR TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS DOES NOT INCLUDE THE DEPENDENTS OF OFFICERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE ON ACTIVE DUTY, AND IT IS TO BE OBSERVED THE APPROPRIATION CITED IS AVAILABLE SPECIFICALLY ONLY "FOR MEMBERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE WHEN CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY," ETC. THERE WOULD SEEM, THEREFORE, TO BE GRAVE DOUBT WHETHER THE STATUTE AUTHORIZES PAYMENT OF THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OF OFFICERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE WHEN ON EXTENDED ACTIVE DUTY AS PROVIDED IN THE REGULATIONS QUOTED ABOVE. THE NAVAL RESERVE ACT OF 1938, AS WAS THE NAVAL RESERVE ACT OF 1925, IS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE LAW CREATING THE NAVAL RESERVE FORCE CONTAINED IN THE ACT OF AUGUST 29, 1916, 39 STAT. 587, ET SEQ. THE LATTER ACT, AT PAGE 588, PROVIDES THAT MEMBERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE FORCE WHEN ACTIVELY EMPLOYED AS THEREIN SET FORTH SHOULD "BE ENTITLED TO THE SAME PAY, ALLOWANCES, GRATUITIES, AND OTHER EMOLUMENTS AS OFFICERS AND ENLISTED MEN OF THE NAVAL SERVICE ON ACTIVE DUTY OF CORRESPONDING RANK OR RATING AND OF THE SAME LENGTH OF SERVICE.' THE AMENDMENT OF JULY 1, 1918, 40 STAT. 712, AS TO PAY AND ALLOWANCES WHEN ON ACTIVE DUTY IS TO THE SAME EFFECT. THESE PRIOR LAWS WERE SPECIFICALLY REPEALED BY SECTION 3 OF THE ACT OF FEBRUARY 28, 1925, 43 STAT. 1081, THE NAVAL RESERVE ACT OF 1925, AND THAT ACT PROVIDED IN SECTION 11, PAGE 1083, THAT COMMISSIONED OFFICERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE WHEN EMPLOYED ON ACTIVE DUTY "SHALL RECEIVE THE PAY, ALLOWANCES, INCLUDING LONGEVITY PAY, AS PROVIDED BY LAW FOR THE RESERVE FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES.' THE SAME LANGUAGE IS USED IN SECTION 7 OF THE NAVAL RESERVE ACT OF 1938, QUOTED ABOVE. IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE DRAFTSMEN OF THE BILLS WHICH BECAME THE ACTS OF 1925 AND 1938 OVERLOOKED THE FACT THAT THE JOINT SERVICE PAY ACT OF JUNE 10, 1922, 42 STAT. 625, IN SECTION 3, 37 U.S.C. 7, AND SECTION 14, 37 U.S.C. 23, PROVIDED ONLY PAY ON A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT BASIS FROM THE PAY ESTABLISHED FOR OFFICERS OF THE REGULAR ESTABLISHMENT, AND FOR RENTAL AND SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES ESTABLISHED BY THE ACT OF 1922, AND THAT THESE LAWS WERE OPEN TO THE CONSTRUCTION THAT NO OTHER ALLOWANCES ACCRUE TO OFFICERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE WHEN ON ACTIVE DUTY OTHER THAN MILEAGE OR TRANSPORTATION AS SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED FOR THEM IN SECTION 7 OF THE NAVAL RESERVE ACT OF 1938. THE MATTER WAS HERETOFORE CONSIDERED IN DECISION TO YOU OF JUNE 19, 1939, B 3084, WITH REFERENCE TO THE PAY THAT MIGHT BE ALLOWED TO A REAR ADMIRAL OF THE NAVAL RESERVE WHEN ON ACTIVE OR TRAINING DUTY. OBVIOUSLY THERE WAS NO PURPOSE TO DENY TO RESERVE OFFICERS OF THE REGULAR ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SAME GRADE AND LENGTH OF SERVICE, AND THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 301 OF THE NAVAL RESERVE ACT OF 1938 THAT " ALL MEMBERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE, WHEN EMPLOYED ON ACTIVE DUTY * * * SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND ORDERS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE NAVY," WILL SUPPORT THE GRANTING OF SUCH ALLOWANCES, WHEN THE REQUISITE CONDITIONS EXIST, TO OFFICERS OF THE NAVAL RESERVE ON ACTIVE DUTY WHICH ACCRUE TO OFFICERS OF THE SAME GRADE AND LENGTH OF SERVICE OF THE REGULAR NAVY UNDER APPROPRIATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS, IN ADDITION TO THE ALLOWANCES SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 14 OF THE JOINT SERVICE PAY ACT OF 1922, AND IN SECTION 7 OF THE NAVAL RESERVE ACT OF 1938, THESE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS NOT BEING INTENDED TO DENY SUCH OTHER ALLOWANCES. HOWEVER, THE DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 12, 1930, 10 COMP. GEN. 122, TO WHICH THE CHIEF OF THE BUREAU OF NAVIGATION REFERS, IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE CASES HE SUGGESTS. THE DECISION SHOWS THAT IT RELATED ONLY TO THE CASE OF A MEDICAL OFFICER APPOINTED TO THE ARMY FROM CIVIL LIFE WHO WAS ASSIGNED FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF MEDICAL DUTIES AT FORT BRADY, MICH., UNDER ORDERS OF DECEMBER 28, 1928, DURING THE TEMPORARY ABSENCE OF THE OFFICER ASSIGNED TO THOSE DUTIES AND WAS NOT RELIEVED FROM THAT TEMPORARY DUTY UNTIL ORDERS OF MAY 17, 1930, ISSUED ASSIGNING HIM TO DUTY IN WASHINGTON, D.C., TO REPORT ON AUGUST 29, 1930. THE PAYROLL RECORDS SHOW HE WAS CONTINUOUSLY ON DUTY AS A MEDICAL OFFICER AT FORT BRADY FROM DECEMBER 28, 1928, TO AUGUST 7, 1930. IN VIEW OF THE CHARACTER OF THE ASSIGNMENT TO DUTY AT FORT BRADY, AND ITS EXTENDED DURATION, IT WAS HELD THAT UPON HIS ASSIGNMENT TO THE FIRST STATION IN THE ARMY SPECIFICALLY DENOMINATED AS "PERMANENT" THE OFFICER WAS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM THE FIRST STATION AT WHICH HE HAD BEEN ASSIGNED AND PERFORMED DUTY FOR A PERIOD IN EXCESS OF 6 MONTHS ALTHOUGH THAT STATION WAS DENOMINATED ,TEMPORARY.' THAT DECISION MADE NO CHANGE IN THE RULE, AND WAS NOT INTENDED TO MAKE ANY CHANGES IN THE RULE, THAT AN OFFICER IS NOT ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM HIS HOME, WHICH IS NOT A PERMANENT STATION, TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION-- WHETHER A RESERVE OFFICER OR A RETIRED OFFICER-- AND THAT THIS RULE IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE ASSIGNMENT OF TEMPORARY DUTY INTERVENING BETWEEN DEPARTURE FROM HIS HOME AND ASSIGNMENT TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION. ACCORDINGLY, THE CLAIM OF LIEUTENANT PIEPER MAY NOT BE ALLOWED AND THE PAPERS THEREOF WILL BE FILED IN THIS OFFICE.