B-157551, OCT. 27, 1965

B-157551: Oct 27, 1965

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

792.50 REPRESENTING PER DIEM STATED TO HAVE BEEN ERRONEOUSLY PAID TO YOU DURING THE PERIOD NOVEMBER 15. IT APPEARS FROM THE INFORMATION FURNISHED THAT IN JULY 1962 YOU WERE DETAILED FROM SUPERVISORY MECHANICAL ENGINEER. A REQUEST WAS MADE FOR YOUR PROMOTION TO THE POSITION ON JULY 30. IT WAS NOT PROCESSED UNTIL JUNE 25. AT WHICH TIME YOU WERE GIVEN PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS. THE DELAY IS REPORTED TO HAVE BEEN THE RESULT OF THE SUSPENSION OF PERSONNEL ACTIONS IMPOSED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF CHEMICAL OFFICER (ARMY REORGANIZATION NEWSLETTER NO. 6. MEANWHILE YOU WERE GIVEN DETAILS AT PINE BLUFF FOR PERIODS OF APPROXIMATELY 30 DAYS EACH BEGINNING ON AUGUST 8. THE DETAILS BEGINNING IN OCTOBER 1962 AND JANUARY 1963 WERE EXTENDED TO APPROXIMATELY 60 DAYS EACH OF TEMPORARY DUTY.

B-157551, OCT. 27, 1965

TO MR. E. B. HURROD, JR.:

WE AGAIN REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 19, 1965, CONCERNING THE REQUEST FOR THE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING OFFICER, U.S. ARMY BIOLOGICAL LABORATORIES, FORT DETRICK, MARYLAND, THAT YOU REFUND THE SUM OF $2,792.50 REPRESENTING PER DIEM STATED TO HAVE BEEN ERRONEOUSLY PAID TO YOU DURING THE PERIOD NOVEMBER 15, 1962 TO MAY 7, 1963.

THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY MENTIONED IN OUR LETTER OF AUGUST 27, 1965, NOW HAS BEEN RECEIVED. IT APPEARS FROM THE INFORMATION FURNISHED THAT IN JULY 1962 YOU WERE DETAILED FROM SUPERVISORY MECHANICAL ENGINEER, GS-830-13, AT THE ABOVE-NAMED INSTALLATION TO MECHANICAL ENGINEER, GS-830-14, AT PINE BLUFF ARSENAL, PINE BLUFF, ARKANSAS, FOR A PERIOD OF APPROXIMATELY 30 DAYS. PURSUANT TO ORDERS YOU DEPARTED FREDERICK ON JULY 8 AND RETURNED THERETO ON AUGUST 1. A REQUEST WAS MADE FOR YOUR PROMOTION TO THE POSITION ON JULY 30, 1962, HOWEVER, IT WAS NOT PROCESSED UNTIL JUNE 25, 1963, AT WHICH TIME YOU WERE GIVEN PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS. THE DELAY IS REPORTED TO HAVE BEEN THE RESULT OF THE SUSPENSION OF PERSONNEL ACTIONS IMPOSED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF CHEMICAL OFFICER (ARMY REORGANIZATION NEWSLETTER NO. 6, MAY 29, 1962). MEANWHILE YOU WERE GIVEN DETAILS AT PINE BLUFF FOR PERIODS OF APPROXIMATELY 30 DAYS EACH BEGINNING ON AUGUST 8, SEPTEMBER 13 AND OCTOBER 23, 1962, AND ON JANUARY 3, MARCH 5, AND MAY 6, 1963. THE DETAILS BEGINNING IN OCTOBER 1962 AND JANUARY 1963 WERE EXTENDED TO APPROXIMATELY 60 DAYS EACH OF TEMPORARY DUTY.

YOU RETURNED TO FORT DETRICK YOUR PERMANENT DUTY STATION UPON COMPLETION OF EACH ASSIGNMENT. YOU WERE PAID PER DIEM FOR SUCH TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENTS INCLUDING TRAVEL TIME.

FROM YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 19, 1965, TO THE COMMANDING OFFICER, FORT DETRICK, IT APPEARS THAT UPON YOUR FOURTH TRIP YOU RENTED AN EMPTY HOUSE IN PINE BLUFF WHICH YOU AND YOUR WIFE OCCUPIED WHILE ON DUTY THERE SUBSEQUENT TO NOVEMBER 15, 1962. SINCE PER DIEM IS NOT PAYABLE WHEN DUTY IS PERFORMED AT THE PLACE OF AN EMPLOYEE'S RESIDENCE THE OFFICIALS AT THE FORT DETRICK INSTALLATION, UPON A SUBSEQUENT REVIEW OF THE MATTER, CONCLUDED THAT YOU HAD ESTABLISHED A RESIDENCE AT PINE BLUFF ON THE DATE MENTIONED AND REQUESTED THAT YOU REFUND THE PER DIEM PAYMENTS INCIDENT TO THE DUTY PERFORMED THEREAFTER.

IT ALSO APPEARS THAT THE HOUSE YOU RENTED (ON A MONTH TO MONTH BASIS) CONTAINED NO FURNITURE OR COOKING EQUIPMENT, ETC., AND THAT BY THE USE OF BORROWED CAMPING COTS YOU MAINTAINED SLEEPING QUARTERS THEREIN, THAT ALL MEALS EXCEPT BREAKFAST WERE EATEN IN RESTAURANTS AND ALL LAUNDRY SENT OUT. FURTHER, DURING THE PERIOD INVOLVED YOUR EFFECTS REMAINED IN STORAGE AT FREDERICK.

THE FAILURE TO GIVE YOU THE PROMOTION AND CHANGE YOUR PERMANENT DUTY STATION TO PINE BLUFF WAS THE RESULT OF ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY. WHILE YOU MAY HAVE ANTICIPATED SUCH PROMOTION AND TRANSFER YOU HAD NO ASSURANCE THEREOF AND ANY MOVEMENT OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS PRIOR TO RECEIPT OF OFFICIAL ORDERS WOULD HAVE BEEN AT YOUR OWN RISK. WHILE IN OUR OPINION THE MATTER COULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED IN A MORE EXPEDITIOUS AND MORE ECONOMICAL MANNER, WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE CONCLUSION EXPRESSED IN THE REPORT FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF FINANCE THAT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES YOU WERE ENTITLED TO PER DIEM AS AUTHORIZED IN YOUR ORDERS AND APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND REPAYMENT THEREOF SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED.

A COPY OF THIS LETTER IS BEING FURNISHED THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF FINANCE.