B-167830, OCTOBER 31, 1969, 49 COMP. GEN. 291

B-167830: Oct 31, 1969

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

WHERE HE IMMEDIATELY REENLISTED AND WAS SUBSEQUENTLY TRANSFERRED TO ENGLAND IS ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT FOR BOTH SEGMENTS OF THE TRAVEL PERFORMED BY HIS DEPENDENTS. BECAUSE PARAGRAPH M7009-5 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS PRECLUDING REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE WHEN A MEMBER IS DISCHARGED AND REENLISTS AT THE SAME STATION UNDER CONTINUOUS SERVICE CONDITIONS IS NOT FOR APPLICATION. HE WAS ORDERED TO THE PHILIPPINES FOR SEPARATION UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF ARTICLE C-10105(2). SUBSEQUENT TO HIS REENLISTMENT HE WAS TRANSFERRED TO ENGLAND UNDER PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS. 1969: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 25. WITH ENCLOSURES REQUESTING A DECISION WHETHER PAYMENT IS AUTHORIZED ON TWO VOUCHERS IN FAVOR OF SD2 EDUARDO H.

B-167830, OCTOBER 31, 1969, 49 COMP. GEN. 291

TRANSPORTATION -- DEPENDENTS -- MILITARY PERSONNEL -- DISCHARGE AND REENLISTMENT A NAVY ENLISTED MAN WHO WITH HIS DEPENDENTS TRAVELED FROM A DUTY STATION WITHIN THE UNITED STATES TO THE PHILIPPINES, THE PLACE OF HIS ENLISTMENT AND RESIDENCE, FOR SEPARATION, WHERE HE IMMEDIATELY REENLISTED AND WAS SUBSEQUENTLY TRANSFERRED TO ENGLAND IS ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT FOR BOTH SEGMENTS OF THE TRAVEL PERFORMED BY HIS DEPENDENTS, BECAUSE PARAGRAPH M7009-5 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS PRECLUDING REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE WHEN A MEMBER IS DISCHARGED AND REENLISTS AT THE SAME STATION UNDER CONTINUOUS SERVICE CONDITIONS IS NOT FOR APPLICATION, AS UNAWARE OF THE MEMBER'S INTENT TO REENLIST, HE WAS ORDERED TO THE PHILIPPINES FOR SEPARATION UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF ARTICLE C-10105(2). BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL MANUAL, AND SUBSEQUENT TO HIS REENLISTMENT HE WAS TRANSFERRED TO ENGLAND UNDER PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS.

TO L. STARBARD, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, OCTOBER 31, 1969:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 25, 1969, NAVACT SUK: A152A: JB 7200, WITH ENCLOSURES REQUESTING A DECISION WHETHER PAYMENT IS AUTHORIZED ON TWO VOUCHERS IN FAVOR OF SD2 EDUARDO H. ALEJO, 544 19 10, USN, FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM NORFOLK, VIRGINIA, TO SUBIC BAY, PHILIPPINES, AND FROM THAT PLACE TO LONDON, ENGLAND. THE REQUEST WAS ASSIGNED PDTATAC CONTROL NO. 69-31 BY THE PER DIEM, TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE COMMITTEE.

BY ORDERS NO. 01-69, DATED JANUARY 10, 1969, THE MEMBER WAS DETACHED FROM DUTY AT NAVAL AIR STATION, NORFOLK, VIRGINIA, AND DIRECTED TO PROCEED TO THE NAVAL STATION, SUBIC BAY, PHILIPPINES, FOR SEPARATION. THE ORDERS SHOW THAT THIS IS WHERE HE HAD BEEN ACCEPTED FOR ENLISTMENT AND THAT HIS HOME OF RECORD WAS CAVITE CITY, PHILIPPINES. HE WAS SEPARATED AT SUBIC BAY ON FEBRUARY 5, 1969, AND REENLISTED THE NEXT DAY AT THE SAME PLACE. BY ORDERS NO. 0298-698 DATED APRIL 8, 1969, THE MEMBER WAS ORDERED FROM SUBIC BAY TO LONDON, ENGLAND, AS A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION.

HIS DEPENDENTS (WIFE AND SON) TRAVELED WITH HIM FROM NORFOLK, VIRGINIA, TO SUBIC BAY, PHILIPPINES, DURING THE PERIOD JANUARY 16 TO FEBRUARY 3, 1969, AND FROM SUBIC BAY TO LONDON, ENGLAND, DURING THE PERIOD APRIL 16 TO 21, 1969. THEY WERE FURNISHED TRANSPORTATION AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE FROM TRAVIS AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA, TO CLARK AIR FORCE BASE, PHILIPPINES; FROM CLARK AIR FORCE BASE TO TRAVIS AIR FORCE BASE; FROM SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, TO PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA, AND FROM MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE TO LONDON, ENGLAND. REIMBURSEMENT IS CLAIMED ON THE SUBMITTED VOUCHERS FOR THE OTHER PORTIONS OF THE TRAVEL.

YOU SAY THAT SINCE PARAGRAPH M7009-5 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS PRECLUDES TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS UPON DISCHARGE AND REENLISTMENT UNDER CONTINUOUS SERVICE CONDITIONS, YOU QUESTION WHETHER THE MEMBER IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR HIS DEPENDENTS FROM NORFOLK, VIRGINIA, TO SUBIC BAY, PHILIPPINES, AND THENCE TO LONDON, ENGLAND.

YOU FURTHER SAY THAT THE THEN COMMANDER, CARRIER DIVISION TWO (CURRENTLY DEPUTY COMMANDER IN CHIEF, U.S. NAVY EUROPE), HAD REQUESTED HIS STAFF TO INVESTIGATE THE LEGALITY OF PERMITTING PETTY OFFICER ALEJO TO TRAVEL TO SUBIC BAY WITH HIS DEPENDENTS "FOR REENLISTMENT AND REASSIGNMENT"; THAT MR. ALEJO WAS ADVISED HE COULD DO SO AND WOULD BE ENTITLED TO TRAVEL ALLOWANCES FOR HIS DEPENDENTS; THAT THE PROBLEM LIES IN THE FACT THAT THE REENLISTMENT WAS UNDER CONTINUOUS SERVICE CONDITIONS AND THAT MR. ALEJO WAS NOT INFORMED OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS AT THE PLACE OF HIS REENLISTMENT.

THE PER DIEM, TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE COMMITTEE IN FORWARDING YOUR REQUEST EXPRESSED THE OPINION THAT PARAGRAPH M7009-5 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS DENIES ENTITLEMENT TO DEPENDENT TRAVEL ONLY IN THOSE CASES WHERE THE MEMBER UPON REENLISTMENT REMAINS AT THE STATION WHERE SEPARATED, AND THAT 33 COMP. GEN. 131 (1953) APPEARS TO PROVIDE A PRECEDENT FOR PAYMENT.

SECTION 406 OF TITLE 37, U.S.C. PROVIDES THAT A MEMBER OF A UNIFORMED SERVICE WHO IS ORDERED TO MAKE A CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION IN KIND FOR HIS DEPENDENTS, TO REIMBURSEMENT THEREFOR, OR TO A MONETARY ALLOWANCE IN PLACE OF TRANSPORTATION IN KIND, SUBJECT TO SUCH CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS, AND TO AND FROM SUCH PLACES AS PRESCRIBED BY THE SECRETARIES CONCERNED. PARAGRAPH M3003-1 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO THAT AUTHORITY, PROVIDES THAT THE TERM "PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION" INCLUDES THE CHANGE FROM HOME OR FROM THE PLACE FROM WHICH ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY, TO FIRST PERMANENT STATION UPON ENLISTMENT, AND FROM LAST DUTY STATION TO HOME OR THE PLACE FROM WHICH ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY UPON SEPARATION FROM THE SERVICE.

PARAGRAPH M7000 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS PROVIDES THAT MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES ARE ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE UPON A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED FROM THE OLD STATION TO THE NEW PERMANENT STATION OR BETWEEN POINTS OTHERWISE AUTHORIZED IN THOSE REGULATIONS.

PARAGRAPH M7009-5 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS (CHANGE 192, JANUARY 1, 1969), PROVIDES THAT A MEMBER WHO IS SEPARATED FROM THE SERVICE OR RELIEVED FROM ACTIVE DUTY BY REASON OF EXPIRATION OF ENLISTMENT OR PRESCRIBED TERM OF SERVICE AND WHO, ON THE FOLLOWING DAY, REENTERS THE SERVICE AT THE STATION AT WHICH SEPARATED OR RELIEVED FROM ACTIVE DUTY, WITH NO CHANGE OF STATION, IS NOT ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. THUS, WHERE THE MEMBER IS DISCHARGED AND REENLISTED AT THE SAME STATION UNDER CONTINUOUS SERVICE CONDITIONS THERE IS NO ENTITLEMENT TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS INCIDENT TO DISCHARGE AND REENLISTMENT WHEN THERE IS NO CHANGE OF STATION INVOLVED. ENTITLEMENT DOES ARISE, HOWEVER, IF THE MEMBER IS ORDERED TO A NEW STATION UPON REENLISTMENT.

ALTHOUGH YOU SAY THAT THE TRAVEL OF THE MEMBER AND HIS DEPENDENTS FROM NORFOLK TO SUBIC BAY WAS "FOR REENLISTMENT AND REASSIGNMENT," THERE IS NO INDICATION OF EITHER REENLISTMENT OR REASSIGNMENT IN THE ORDERS OF JANUARY 10, 1969, WHICH DIRECTED THE MEMBER TO REPORT TO THE U.S. NAVAL STATION AT SUBIC BAY "FOR SEPARATION" UNDER AUTHORITY OF ARTICLE C 10105, BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL MANUAL, AND STATED THAT HIS FINAL DESTINATION WAS HIS HOME OF RECORD.

ARTICLE C-10105(2), BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL MANUAL, PROVIDES THAT ENLISTED PERSONNEL WHO ARE CITIZENS OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES WHOSE HOME OF RECORD IS IN THE PHILIPPINES AND WHOSE SEPARATION IS AUTHORIZED OR DIRECTED, "EXCEPT THOSE REENLISTING OR EXTENDING THEIR ENLISTMENT," SHALL BE TRANSFERRED TO THE U.S. NAVAL STATION, SUBIC BAY, PHILIPPINES, FOR TEMPORARY DUTY PENDING SEPARATION. THUS, IF IT WERE KNOWN THAT THE MEMBER INTENDED TO REENLIST IMMEDIATELY UPON DISCHARGE AND THAT HE WOULD BE REASSIGNED THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO PROPER AUTHORITY UNDER THAT REGULATION TO ORDER HIM TO SUBIC BAY FOR DISCHARGE. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES HE PRESUMABLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISCHARGED AND REENLISTED AT NORFOLK AND UPON REASSIGNMENT THE AUTHORIZED TRAVEL OF HIS DEPENDENTS WOULD HAVE BEEN FROM NORFOLK TO LONDON.

IN THE CASE INVOLVED IN THE DECISION CITED BY THE COMMITTEE, 33 COMP. GEN. 131, THERE WAS A BREAK IN SERVICE AND THUS THAT CASE DIFFERS FROM THE PRESENT CASE IN WHICH THERE WAS NO BREAK IN SERVICE. SEE, ALSO, 33 COMP. GEN. 136 (1953), AND COMPARE 41 COMP. GEN. 661 (1962) AND B 119374 OF AUGUST 5, 1954, COPY ENCLOSED.

WHILE THE ORDERS OF JANUARY 10, 1969, APPEAR QUESTIONABLE IN VIEW OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES MENTIONED BY YOU, THEY WERE ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE CITED NAVY REGULATION TO DIRECT A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FROM LAST DUTY STATION TO HOME OF RECORD FOR SEPARATION, AND TRAVEL WAS COMPLETED THEREUNDER. THE RECORD DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE DEPENDENTS TRAVELED WITH THE INTENTION OF VISITING BUT RATHER THAT THEY RETURNED TO THE MEMBER'S HOME COUNTRY INCIDENT TO HIS DISCHARGE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE MEMBER WAS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR HIS DEPENDENTS FROM NORFOLK TO SUBIC BAY INCIDENT TO THE ORDERS OF JANUARY 10, 1969.

THE MEMBER'S REENLISTMENT ON FEBRUARY 6, 1969, FOLLOWING HIS SEPARATION ON FEBRUARY 5 WAS EFFECTED WITH NO CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION DIRECTED, HIS ASSIGNMENT APPARENTLY THEN BEING AT SUBIC BAY. THEREFORE, NO RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AROSE BY REASON OF HIS REENTRY INTO THE SERVICE WITHIN THE CONTEMPLATION OF PARAGRAPH M7009-5 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. HOWEVER, THEREAFTER THE ORDERS OF APRIL 8, 1969, DIRECTED A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FROM SUBIC BAY TO LONDON, ENGLAND, INCIDENT TO WHICH THE MEMBER WAS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR THE MOVEMENT OF HIS DEPENDENTS.

ACCORDINGLY, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT, PAYMENT IS AUTHORIZED ON THE VOUCHERS WHICH ARE RETURNED HEREWITH.