B-151418, JULY 26, 1963, 43 COMP. GEN. 91

B-151418, JULY 26, 1963, 43 COMP. GEN. 91

TRANSPORTATION - DEPENDENTS - MILITARY PERSONNEL - DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE - REENLISTMENTS - DISCHARGE AT ANOTHER STATION AN ARMY MEMBER WHO SUBSEQUENT TO DISCHARGE AND REENLISTMENT OVERSEAS REMAINED AT HIS OVERSEAS STATION SOMETIME BEFORE RETURNING TO THE UNITED STATES FOR RELEASE BUT WHO BEFORE THE RELEASE WAS EFFECTED WAS REASSIGNED TO NEW STATION IN THE UNITED STATES MAY HAVE THE ORDERS DIRECTING A RELEASE WHICH WAS NEVER ACCOMPLISHED REGARDED AS A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION RATHER THAN A TRANSFER TO A SEPARATION POINT FOR DISCHARGE AND A REENLISTMENT WHICH WOULD PRECLUDE ENTITLEMENT TO A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE AND, THEREFORE, UPON TRANSFER TO THE NEW PERMANENT DUTY STATION THE MEMBER BECAME ENTITLED TO A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE.

TO CAPTAIN R. B. ADAMS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, JULY 26, 1963:

BY 3D INDORSEMENT DATED APRIL 26, 1963, THE PER DIEM, TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE COMMITTEE FORWARDED YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 13, 1963, REQUESTING AN ADVANCE DECISION AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF MAKING PAYMENT OF A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE TO SPECIALIST 6TH CLASS JON E. FINK, REGULAR ARMY, IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES PRESENTED. YOUR REQUEST HAS BEEN ASSIGNED PDTATAC CONTROL NO. 63-11.

THE INCLOSURES TRANSMITTED WITH THE VOUCHER SHOW THAT ON SEPTEMBER 1, 1961, THE MEMBER, WHO WAS ON DUTY WITH THE 70TH MEDICAL DEPOT, APO 219, REQUESTED PERMISSION TO BE DISCHARGED PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF HIS TERM OF SERVICE IN ORDER TO REENLIST AND BE REASSIGNED TO ANOTHER UNIT IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY, EUROPE. HE WAS DISCHARGED ON OCTOBER 26, 1961, AND HE REENLISTED AT THE SAME STATION ON THE NEXT DAY. ORDERS OF OCTOBER 27, 1961, ASSIGNED HIM TO THE 10TH GENERAL DISPENSARY, APO 757, FOR DUTY, BUT WHEN HE REPORTED AT THAT STATION THERE WAS NO VACANCY FOR HIS GRADE AND MOS. THE MEMBER CONSEQUENTLY RETURNED TO HIS OLD DUTY STATION PENDING A DETERMINATION TO BE MADE AS TO HIS DISPOSITION. A LETTER DATED JANUARY 22, 1962, HEADQUARTERS, U.S. ARMY, EUROPE, QUOTED A DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY MESSAGE DATED JANUARY 19, 1962, WHICH STATED THAT THE ENLISTED MAN'S CONTRACT OF OCTOBER 27, 1961, COULD NOT BE VOIDED, BUT THE MEMBER COULD BE RETURNED TO THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES FOR DISCHARGE, IF HE SO DESIRED, AND THAT HE COULD REENLIST FOR ANY AUTHORIZED OPTION AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF REENLISTMENT. THE FILE INDICATES THAT THE MEMBER AGREED TO RETURN TO THE UNITED STATES FOR SEPARATION, AND BY LETTER ORDER 02-02, DATED FEBRUARY 12, 1962, HE WAS REASSIGNED TO THE U.S. ARMY TRANSFER STATION, FORT HAMILTON, NEW YORK, FOR PROCESSING FOR SEPARATION, TO REPORT NOT LATER THAN FEBRUARY 17, 1962. HOWEVER, BY SPECIAL ORDERS NO. 61, U.S. ARMY PERSONNEL CENTER, FOR HAMILTON, NEW YORK, DATED MARCH 2, 1962, THE MEMBER WAS REASSIGNED TO U.S. ARMY MEDICAL OPTICAL AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, FOR DUTY. THE FILE ALSO CONTAINS A NOTATION THAT A STATEMENT OF WAIVER OF SEPARATION WAS NOT CONTAINED IN THE ENLISTED MAN'S RECORD UPON HIS ARRIVAL AT HIS STATION IN ST. LOUIS, BUT THAT HE HAD SIGNED A STATEMENT OF FEBRUARY 1, 1963, THAT ON OR ABOUT MARCH 1, 1962, HE ELECTED TO REMAIN ON ACTIVE DUTY AND THAT HE HAD WAIVED HIS RIGHT TO DISCHARGE.

IT WAS STATED IN THE RECORD THAT THE MEMBER WAS RETURNED TO THE UNITED STATES AT HIS OWN REQUEST FOR AN EARLY SEPARATION AND, THEREFORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRINCIPLE STATED IN OUR DECISION OF MAY 12, 1959, B- 135627, IF HE HAD BEEN DISCHARGED HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE, EVEN THOUGH HE MAY HAVE REENLISTED WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE AND THEN BEEN GIVEN A PERMANENT ASSIGNMENT. IN VIEW THEREOF, WHERE THE MEMBER, UPON ARRIVING IN THE UNITED STATES, WITHDREW HIS REQUEST FOR SEPARATION AND CONTINUED IN THE SERVICE UNDER THE EXISTING CONTRACT, HIS ENTITLEMENT TO A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE UNDER ORDERS TO HIS NEW DUTY STATION WAS CONSIDERED QUESTIONABLE. THEREFORE, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH 9003-5 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS AND PARAGRAPH 12-4C (2), ARMY REGULATIONS 37-106, PAYMENT OF THE ALLOWANCE WAS NOT MADE.

THE PER DIEM, TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE, IN TRANSMITTING YOUR REQUEST FOR AN ADVANCE DECISION, STATES THAT IN ITS VIEW THERE IS AN IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PRESENT SITUATION AND THAT CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION REFERRED TO ABOVE, IN THAT THE MEMBER IN THIS CASE EXERCISED HIS OPTION TO CONTINUE ON ACTIVE DUTY AND WAS NOT SEPARATED. THEREFORE, THE ORDERS OF MARCH 2, 1962, MAY BE CONSIDERED AS EFFECTING A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FROM THE OVERSEAS PERMANENT STATION TO THE NEW PERMANENT STATION AT ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI.

UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 37 U.S.C. 407, A MEMBER OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES WHOSE DEPENDENTS MAKE AN AUTHORIZED MOVE IN CONNECTION WITH HIS PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION IS ENTITLED TO A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE,EXCEPT IN THE CASE WHERE HE IS ORDERED FROM HIS HOME TO HIS FIRST DUTY STATION OR FROM HIS LAST DUTY STATION TO HIS HOME. PARAGRAPH 9003-5 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, PROMULGATED PURSUANT THERETO, PROVIDES THAT A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE IS NOT PAYABLE INCIDENT TO TRAVEL PERFORMED FROM LAST DUTY STATION IN ONE PERIOD OF SERVICE TO THE FIRST DUTY STATION IN ANOTHER PERIOD OF SERVICE WHEN THERE WAS NO ORDERED CHANGE OF STATION BETWEEN THESE STATIONS. CONSISTENT WITH THAT LIMITATION, PARAGRAPH 12-4C (2), ARMY REGULATIONS 37-106, PROVIDES THAT A MEMBER ORDERED FROM HIS OLD PERMANENT STATION TO A TRANSFER ACTIVITY FOR DISCHARGE OR SEPARATION WHO ENLISTS OR REENLISTS AT A TRANSFER ACTIVITY WITHOUT A BREAK IN ACTIVE SERVICE AND IS ASSIGNED A NEW PERMANENT STATION IS NOT ENTITLED TO PAYMENT OF THE DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE. HOWEVER, SUBPARAGRAPH (1) PROVIDES THAT WHERE A MEMBER IS SEPARATED AND ENLISTED OR REENLISTED AT HIS OLD PERMANENT STATION, IN THE SAME OR A DIFFERENT STATUS, WITHOUT A BREAK IN ACTIVE SERVICE AND IS IMMEDIATELY REASSIGNED ON A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, HE IS ENTITLED TO A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE.

IN OUR DECISION OF MAY 12, 1959, B-135627, WE STATED THE GENERAL RULE THAT DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE IS NOT PAYABLE TO A MEMBER ORDERED FROM HIS PERMANENT STATION TO A PROCESSING OR SEPARATION STATION FOR DISCHARGE WHO SUBSEQUENTLY REENLISTS WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE AND IS ASSIGNED A NEW PERMANENT STATION BY ORDERS ISSUED AT THE POINT OF REENLISTMENT. SEE 36 COMP. GEN. 71 AND 38 ID. 405. IN THE PRESENT CASE, HOWEVER, THE MEMBER WAS REENLISTED ON OCTOBER 27, 1961, AT HIS OLD PERMANENT STATION AND HE REMAINED AT THAT STATION FOR SOME TIME PRIOR TO HIS DETACHMENT FOR TRANSFER TO THE UNITED STATES. IT MAY THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED THAT IF HIS REASSIGNMENT PURSUANT TO LETTER ORDER 02-02, DATED FEBRUARY 12, 1962, HAD BEEN TO A PERMANENT STATION, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH 12-4C (1), ARMY REGULATIONS 27 -106. SEE B 130003, DATED JANUARY 14, 1957, AND 40 COMP. GEN. 251.

WHILE THE ORDERS OF FEBRUARY 12, 1962, DIRECTED TRAVEL TO FORT HAMILTON FOR THE PURPOSE OF RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY, SUCH RELEASE WAS NOT IN FACT ACCOMPLISHED, THOSE ORDERS IN EFFECT BEING AMENDED BY THE ORDERS OF MARCH 2, 1962, TO DIRECT REASSIGNMENT TO A NEW DUTY STATION IN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES IT MAY BE CONSIDERED THAT SUBSEQUENT TO HIS DISCHARGE ON OCTOBER 26 AND REENLISTMENT ON OCTOBER 27, 1961, AT THE 70TH MEDICAL DEPOT, THE MEMBER WAS TRANSFERRED ON A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION TO ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, BY LETTER ORDERS 02-02, ISSUED FEBRUARY 12, 1962, AT HIS OLD PERMANENT STATION, AS MODIFIED BY SPECIAL ORDERS NO. 61, DATED MARCH 2, 1962, AND CONSEQUENTLY THAT SUCH TRANSFER DID NOT INVOLVE ORDERS FROM THE MEMBER'S HOME TO FIRST DUTY STATION OR FROM LAST DUTY STATION TO HIS HOME WITHIN THE CONTEMPLATION OF THE STATUTE. HE IS THEREFORE ENTITLED TO DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE INCIDENT TO SUCH TRANSFER.

PAYMENT ON THE SUBMITTED VOUCHER, WHICH IS RETURNED HEREWITH, IS AUTHORIZED, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.