B-156059, MAR. 10, 1965
Highlights
RETIRED: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 25. YOU WERE TRANSFERRED FROM KASHMIR TO NEW YORK. UPON COMPLETION OF SEPARATION PROCESSING YOU WERE TO PROCEED TO YOUR HOME OF RECORD. YOU WERE PLACED ON THE RETIRED LIST EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1. YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE LATTER TRAVEL WAS DISALLOWED BY THE SETTLEMENT MENTIONED ABOVE FOR THE REASONS STATED THEREIN. YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW IS BASED ON PUBLIC LAW 88-238. FOR DUTY WERE MODIFIED BY THE ORDERS OF JUNE 29. THAT THE LATTER ORDERS WERE MODIFIED BY THE ORDERS OF SEPTEMBER 16. AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES TO MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES AND PAYMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION OF THEIR DEPENDENTS AND HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDERS THAT WERE LATER CANCELED.
B-156059, MAR. 10, 1965
TO COMMANDER FLOYD E. JACKSON, USNR, RETIRED:
FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 25, 1964, RECEIVED JANUARY 25, 1965, IN EFFECT REQUESTING REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT OF AUGUST 19, 1954, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF YOUR DEPENDENTS FROM GREENWICH, CONNECTICUT, TO PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, SEPTEMBER 3 TO 10, 1953.
BY ORDERS DATED JANUARY 9, 1953, YOU WERE TRANSFERRED FROM KASHMIR TO NEW YORK, NEW YORK, FOR DUTY. YOU REPORTED AT NEW YORK ON JULY 20, 1953, AND RECEIVED ORDERS DATED JUNE 29, 1953, DIRECTING YOUR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY ON OR ABOUT OCTOBER 1, 1953. UPON COMPLETION OF SEPARATION PROCESSING YOU WERE TO PROCEED TO YOUR HOME OF RECORD, PASADENA, CALIFORNIA. ON JULY 21, 1953, YOU REQUESTED VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT AND AS A RESULT, BY ORDERS DATED SEPTEMBER 16, 1953, YOU WERE PLACED ON THE RETIRED LIST EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 1953. THE RECORD SHOWS YOU SELECTED PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, AS YOUR HOME UPON RETIREMENT AND TRAVELED THERE, ARRIVING SEPTEMBER 30, 1953. IN THE MEANTIME YOUR DEPENDENTS, WHO HAD TRAVELED FROM PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, TO GREENWICH, CONNECTICUT, AUGUST 13 TO 18, 1953, RETURNED TO PASADENA SEPTEMBER 3 TO 10, 1953. YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE LATTER TRAVEL WAS DISALLOWED BY THE SETTLEMENT MENTIONED ABOVE FOR THE REASONS STATED THEREIN.
YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW IS BASED ON PUBLIC LAW 88-238, DECEMBER 23, 1963, IT BEING YOUR CONTENTION THAT THE ORDERS OF JANUARY 9, 1953, TRANSFERRING YOU FROM KASHMIR TO NEW YORK, NEW YORK, FOR DUTY WERE MODIFIED BY THE ORDERS OF JUNE 29, 1953, ASSIGNING YOU TO INACTIVE DUTY, AND THAT THE LATTER ORDERS WERE MODIFIED BY THE ORDERS OF SEPTEMBER 16, 1953, EFFECTING YOUR RETIREMENT.
THE ACT OF DECEMBER 23, 1963, PUBLIC LAW 88-238, 37 U.S.C. 406A, EFFECTIVE FROM OCTOBER 1, 1949, AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES TO MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES AND PAYMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION OF THEIR DEPENDENTS AND HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDERS THAT WERE LATER CANCELED, REVOKED OR MODIFIED. IN THE PRESENT CASE, YOUR DEPENDENTS TRAVELED FROM YOUR HOME, PASADENA, TO YOUR STATION, NEW YORK CITY (AND TO GREENWICH, CONNECTICUT), AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDERS OF JANUARY 9, 1953, ASSIGNING YOU TO DUTY IN NEW YORK CITY AND AFTER YOU HAD RECEIVED ORDERS DIRECTING YOUR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY AND RETURN TO PASADENA. THEIR RETURN TRAVEL TO PASADENA PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDERS OF JUNE 29, 1953, DIRECTING YOUR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY, WAS NOT AFFECTED BY THE FACT THOSE ORDERS WERE MODIFIED BY THE ORDERS OF SEPTEMBER 16, 1953, EFFECTING YOUR RETIREMENT SINCE IN EITHER CASE THEIR TRAVEL ENTITLEMENT, IF ANY, WOULD HAVE BEEN FROM NEW YORK TO PASADENA, SINCE YOU SELECTED THE LATTER CITY AS YOUR HOME UPON RETIREMENT. THUS, THE ACT OF DECEMBER 23, 1963, AFFORDS NO BASIS FOR THE PAYMENT OF YOUR CLAIM.
THE STATUTE IN EFFECT AT THE TIME HERE INVOLVED (SECTION 303 (C) OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949, 63 STAT. 814) AND CHAPTER 7 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, ISSUED PURSUANT THERETO AUTHORIZE TRANSPORTATION AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE OF DEPENDENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES WHEN ORDERED TO MAKE A CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION, INCLUDING THE CHANGE FROM LAST STATION TO HOME. A RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT THE EXPENSE OF THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT AN ALLOWANCE PAYABLE IN ALL EVENTS ON THE BASIS THAT SOME TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED. EVEN THOUGH TRAVEL IS PERFORMED, NO RIGHT TO REIMBURSEMENT BY THE GOVERNMENT ARISES UNLESS THE TRAVEL MAY BE CONSIDERED AS INCIDENT TO A CHANGE OF RESIDENCE RESULTING FROM AN ORDERED PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FOR THE MEMBER. IT CONSISTENTLY HAS BEEN HELD BY THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT THAT THE EXPENSE OF TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS MERELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF VISITING THE MEMBER, FOR PLEASURE TRIPS, OR FOR OTHER PURPOSES NOT CONTEMPLATING A CHANGE OF THE DEPENDENT'S RESIDENCE IN CONNECTION WITH A CHANGE OF THE MEMBER'S PERMANENT STATION IS NOT AN OBLIGATION OF THE GOVERNMENT. 33 COMP. GEN. 307.
AS STATED ABOVE, YOUR DEPENDENTS DEPARTED FROM YOUR HOME IN PASADENA AND TRAVELED TO GREENWICH AFTER YOU RECEIVED THE ORDERS OF JUNE 29, 1953, DIRECTING YOUR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY ON OCTOBER 1, 1953, AND AFTER YOU HAD REQUESTED THAT THE ORDERS BE CHANGED TO EFFECT YOUR RETIREMENT ON SUCH DATE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE TRAVEL OF YOUR DEPENDENTS FROM YOUR HOME, PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, TO GREENWICH, CONNECTICUT, AND RETURN, MUST BE REGARDED AS TRAVEL OTHER THAN FOR THE PURPOSE OF CHANGING THEIR RESIDENCE INCIDENT TO YOUR DUTY ASSIGNMENT IN NEW YORK OR YOUR RETIREMENT. HENCE, UNDER THE LAW AND REGULATIONS, NO REIMBURSEMENT IS AUTHORIZED FOR THE TRAVEL CLAIMED, AND WE HAVE NO CHOICE OTHER THAN TO SUSTAIN THE SETTLEMENT DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM.