B-141261, DEC. 28, 1959

B-141261: Dec 28, 1959

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE OFFICE: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 31. YOUR LETTER WAS TRANSMITTED TO US BY ENDORSEMENT DATED NOVEMBER 10. THE CLAIMS HAVE BEEN NUMBERED CLAIM I (DAY). THEY WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THAT ORDER. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT SERGEANT DAY WAS TRANSFERRED FROM LONG BEACH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. PROVIDED THAT CONCURRENT TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS WAS NOT AUTHORIZED. IT IS STATED THAT MRS. WHICH WERE INSPECTED AND APPROVED FOR OCCUPANCY BY THE BASE HOUSING OFFICER. THE CLAIM IS FOR DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE AND REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENT FROM LONG BEACH. REQUIRES SOME EVIDENCE THAT THE DEPENDENTS WERE AUTHORIZED TO RESIDE AT THE OVERSEAS STATION. IT IS SHOWN THAT LIEUTENANT LEVINSON WAS TRANSFERRED FROM SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE.

B-141261, DEC. 28, 1959

TO CAPTAIN W. J. COBB, USAF, ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE OFFICE:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 31, 1959, SUBMITTING FOR ADVANCE DECISION VOUCHERS IN FAVOR OF TECHNICAL SERGEANT CLIFFORD A. DAY, AF 17350145; CHAPLAIN (FIRST LIEUTENANT) NATHAN P. LEVINSON, AO 970508, AND CAPTAIN RICHARD L. RUTLEDGE, AO 18449975, FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS AND (IN THE FIRST TWO CASES) DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE. YOUR LETTER WAS TRANSMITTED TO US BY ENDORSEMENT DATED NOVEMBER 10, 1959, WITH THE INFORMATION THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN ASSIGNED CONTROL NO. 59-45 BY THE PER DIEM, TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE COMMITTEE.

THE CLAIMS HAVE BEEN NUMBERED CLAIM I (DAY), CLAIM II (LEVINSON), AND CLAIM III (RUTLEDGE). THEY WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THAT ORDER.

IN THE FIRST CLAIM, THE RECORD SHOWS THAT SERGEANT DAY WAS TRANSFERRED FROM LONG BEACH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO RAMSTEIN AIR BASE, GERMANY, BY PARAGRAPH 3, SPECIAL ORDERS NO. 365, DATED AUGUST 13, 1958. THE ORDERS REQUIRED HIM TO REPORT AT MCQUIRE AIR FORCE BASE, NEW JERSEY, FOR AIR TRANSPORTATION TO HIS NEW STATION, AND PROVIDED THAT CONCURRENT TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS WAS NOT AUTHORIZED. HIS DEPENDENTS (WIFE AND 2 CHILDREN UNDER 5 YEARS OF AGE) TRAVELED FROM LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO WEST BERLIN, GERMANY, AT PERSONAL EXPENSE, AUGUST 16 TO SEPTEMBER 27, 1958, WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE COMMANDER, RAMSTEIN AIR BASE. IT IS STATED THAT MRS. DAY, A GERMAN NATIONAL, TRAVELED ON A GERMAN PASSPORT AND ESTABLISHED A RESIDENCE WITH HER MOTHER IN WEST BERLIN. SERGEANT DAY ARRIVED AT RAMSTEIN AIR BASE ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1958, AND IMMEDIATELY APPLIED FOR GOVERNMENT QUARTERS. GOVERNMENT QUARTERS NOT BEING AVAILABLE, HE OBTAINED QUARTERS ON THE GERMAN ECONOMY, WHICH WERE INSPECTED AND APPROVED FOR OCCUPANCY BY THE BASE HOUSING OFFICER, RAMSTEIN AIR BASE. MRS. DAY JOINED HER HUSBAND IN THE VICINITY OF HIS STATION ON OCTOBER 30, 1958.

THE CLAIM IS FOR DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE AND REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENT FROM LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO NEW YORK, NEW YORK. YOUR DOUBT AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF PAYMENT ARISES FROM THE FACT THAT DECISION B- 130251, DATED FEBRUARY 27, 1957, INDICATES ENTITLEMENT UNDER PARAGRAPH 7008-3 (2) OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, CHANGE 42, FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS NOT TO EXCEED FROM LAST STATION TO POINT OF DEPARTURE FROM THE UNITED STATES, REQUIRES SOME EVIDENCE THAT THE DEPENDENTS WERE AUTHORIZED TO RESIDE AT THE OVERSEAS STATION.

IN THE SECOND CLAIM, IT IS SHOWN THAT LIEUTENANT LEVINSON WAS TRANSFERRED FROM SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE, ILLINOIS, TO RAMSTEIN AIR BASE, GERMANY, FOR DUTY BY PARAGRAPH 3, SPECIAL ORDERS NO. A-680, DATED JULY 16, 1958. THE ORDERS STATED THAT CONCURRENT TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS WAS NOT AUTHORIZED. THAT TIME LIEUTENANT LEVINSON'S DEPENDENTS (WIFE AND DAUGHTER) WERE RESIDING IN WEST BERLIN, GERMANY. MRS. LEVINSON HAD DEPARTED THE UNITED STATES IN OCTOBER 1956, ON A TOURIST PASSPORT TO ATTEND THE FREE UNIVERSITY OF BERLIN. THE MEMBER ARRIVED AT RAMSTEIN AIR BASE ON AUGUST 10, 1958. HIS DEPENDENTS TRAVELED TO HIS STATION ON AUGUST 9 AND 10, 1958, AND MOVED INTO GERMAN ECONOMY HOUSING NEARBY.

THE CLAIM IS FOR DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE AND REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS FROM WEST BERLIN, GERMANY, TO KAISERSLAUTERN, GERMANY. YOUR DOUBT AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF PAYMENT ARISES FROM THE FACT THAT THE DEPENDENTS WERE IN THE OVERSEAS THEATER PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE ORDERS ASSIGNING THE MEMBER TO HIS OVERSEAS STATION.

IN THE THIRD CLAIM, CAPTAIN RUTLEDGE WAS TRANSFERRED FROM MATHER AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA, TO RAMSTEIN AIR BASE, GERMANY, BY PARAGRAPH 26, SPECIAL ORDERS NO. 213, DATED SEPTEMBER 25, 1957, WHICH LIKEWISE PROHIBITED CONCURRENT TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS. HIS DEPENDENTS (WIFE AND 2 CHILDREN), TRAVELED FROM MATHER AIR FORCE BASE, TO HIS HOME, LAFAYETTE, INDIANA, OCTOBER 4 TO 9, 1957, HE HAVING DESIGNATED LAFAYETTE PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 7005-2 (1) OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. HE WAS REIMBURSED FOR SUCH TRAVEL AND WAS PAID A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE. THE DEPENDENTS FURTHER TRAVELED FROM LAFAYETTE, INDIANA, TO RAMSTEIN AIR BASE, GERMANY, DECEMBER 26 TO 28, 1957, AT PERSONAL EXPENSE WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE COMMANDER, RAMSTEIN AIR BASE. UPON THEIR ARRIVAL THE MEMBER AND HIS DEPENDENTS WERE PERMITTED TO OCCUPY TRANSIENT OFFICER BOQ FACILITIES AT THE BASE. THEY REMAINED THERE UNTIL FEBRUARY 18, 1958, AT WHICH TIME THE MEMBER WAS ASSIGNED FAMILY-TYPE GOVERNMENT QUARTERS.

THE CLAIM IS FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS LAFAYETTE, INDIANA, TO NEW YORK, NEW YORK, AND FROM FRANKFURT TO RAMSTEIN AIR BASE, GERMANY. YOUR DOUBT AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF PAYMENT ARISES FROM THE FACT THAT IT WAS INDICATED IN DECISION OF AUGUST 2, 1955, 35 COMP. GEN. 61, THAT THE OVERSEAS COMMANDER MUST AUTHORIZE TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS TO THE OVERSEAS STATION PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF TRAVEL TO ENTITLE A MEMBER TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM A DESIGNATED LOCATION TO THE OVERSEAS STATION.

IT IS STATED THAT IN EACH OF THE ABOVE CASES THE DEPENDENTS UPON ARRIVAL AT RAMSTEIN AIR BASE WERE IMMEDIATELY GRANTED FULL BASE DEPENDENT PRIVILEGES, I.E., COMMISSARY, POST EXCHANGE, MEDICAL, SCHOOLING, ETC., AND THE SPONSORS WERE PLACED ON THE WAITING LIST FOR ASSIGNMENT TO FAMILY GOVERNMENT QUARTERS.

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, AS AMENDED, 37 U.S.C. 253 (C), WHICH EXPRESSLY PROVIDES THAT THE 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 OF THE 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. PARAGRAPH 7005, CHANGE 42, JANUARY 1, 1956, PROVIDES THAT WHEN A MEMBER IS TRANSFERRED OR ASSIGNED UNDER PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS TO A PLACE WHERE HIS DEPENDENTS ARE NOT PERMITTED, FOR MILITARY REASONS, TO ACCOMPANY HIM, HE IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE FROM THE PLACE AT WHICH THE DEPENDENTS ARE LOCATED ON THE DATE HE RECEIVED SUCH ORDERS TO ANY PLACE IN THE UNITED STATES WHICH HE MAY DESIGNATE OR, SUBJECT TO PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE SECRETARY CONCERNED OR HIS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE, TO ANY TERRITORY OR POSSESSION OF THE UNITED STATES, NOT TO EXCEED THE COST FROM THE OLD PERMANENT STATION TO SUCH DESIGNATED PLACE, AND LATER FROM SUCH DESIGNATED PLACE TO HIS DUTY STATION WHEN THE RESTRICTION IS REMOVED AT THAT STATION OR WHEN HE IS TRANSFERRED TO A DUTY STATION TO WHICH MOVEMENT OF DEPENDENTS IS AUTHORIZED. PARAGRAPH 7008-3 (2), CHANGE 42, OF THE SAME 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 THE DEPENDENTS ARE LOCATED UPON RECEIPT OF THE CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS, NOT TO EXCEED THE COST FROM THE MEMBER'S OLD PERMANENT STATION TO THE POINT OF ACTUAL DEPARTURE OF DEPENDENTS FROM THE UNITED STATES IN CONJUNCTION WITH TRAVEL TO A POINT OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES DESIGNATED BY THE MEMBER. PART IV, ARMY REGULATIONS 55-46, RELATING TO NONCONCURRENT TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS OF ARMY AND AIR FORCE PERSONNEL TO OVERSEAS STATIONS, PROVIDES FOR SUCH TRAVEL ON A PRIORITY BASIS UPON APPROVAL OF THE OVERSEAS COMMANDER CONCERNED. THE NET EFFECT OF THE REGULATIONS IS TO LIMIT ENTITLEMENT TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS TO A DESIGNATED PLACE WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR TO THE POINT OF DEPARTURE FROM THE UNITED STATES WHEN TRAVEL BEYOND CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES IS TO A POINT OTHER THAN AN APPROVED DESIGNATED PLACE IN A TERRITORY OR POSSESSION OF THE UNITED STATES; UNTIL THEIR PRESENCE AT THE OVERSEAS STATION IS AUTHORIZED BY THE OVERSEAS COMMANDER CONCERNED, OR THE RESTRICTION REMOVED. THE FACT THAT DEPENDENTS DO NOT TRAVEL TO A DESIGNATED PLACE, HOWEVER, DOES NOT DEPRIVE THE MEMBER OF HIS RIGHT UNDER THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT AND PARAGRAPH 7000 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS BETWEEN OTHER POINTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE INCIDENT TO HIS PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION CONSISTENT WITH THE LIMITATION IMPOSED ON SUCH TRANSPORTATION BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROHIBITION AGAINST HIS DEPENDENTS ACCOMPANYING HIM TO HIS OVERSEAS STATION.

IN CLAIM I, THE TRAVEL OF THE DEPENDENTS FROM LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO WEST BERLIN, GERMANY, WAS NOT TRAVEL TO A DESIGNATED PLACE AS CONTEMPLATED BY THE REGULATIONS. HOWEVER, SUCH FACT DOES NOT DEPRIVE THE MEMBER OF ENTITLEMENT UNDER PARAGRAPH 7008-3 (2) TO REIMBURSEMENT FOR THEIR TRAVEL IN THE UNITED STATES NOT TO EXCEED FROM HIS OLD STATION TO THE POINT OF DEPARTURE OF DEPENDENTS FROM THE UNITED STATES. THE FACT THAT HIS DEPENDENTS TRAVELED TO THE COUNTRY IN WHICH HIS NEW STATION WAS LOCATED DOES NOT AFFECT THAT ENTITLEMENT. ACCORDINGLY, CLAIM I IS RETURNED HEREWITH, PAYMENT THEREOF BEING AUTHORIZED IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.

AS TO CLAIM II, SINCE THE MEMBER WAS ORDERED TO A RESTRICTED STATION WITH THE MEANING OF PARAGRAPH 7005 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, TRAVEL OF THE DEPENDENTS TO THE STATION WAS NOT AUTHORIZED UNTIL THE RESTRICTION WAS REMOVED. SINCE THE TRAVEL HERE INVOLVED WAS TO THE STATION PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OF THE RESTRICTION, NO PART OF THE CLAIM MAY BE PAID NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE DEPENDENTS WERE IN THE OVERSEAS THEATER PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE ORDERS ASSIGNING THE MEMBER TO HIS STATION. THE PAPERS OF THE CLAIM WILL BE RETAINED HERE.

AS TO CLAIM III, SINCE THE DEPENDENTS TRAVELED TO A DESIGNATED PLACE INCIDENT TO THE ORDERS TRANSFERRING THE MEMBER TO A RESTRICTED OVERSEAS STATION, NO FURTHER TRAVEL WAS AUTHORIZED EXCEPT PURSUANT TO PRIOR AUTHORIZATION BY THE OVERSEAS COMMANDER. THE TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED WITHOUT SUCH AUTHORIZATION. THE FACT THAT UPON ARRIVAL AT THE OVERSEAS STATION THE DEPENDENTS WERE ACCORDED SOME MEASURE OF ACCEPTANCE MAY NOT BE REGARDED AS NULLIFYING THE REGULATIONS. THEREFORE, PAYMENT ..END :