B-174884, FEB 14, 1972

B-174884: Feb 14, 1972

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

CLAIMANT WAS DENIED REIMBURSEMENT FOR DEPENDENT TRAVEL PURSUANT TO JTR M7000-8 AND NOW SEEKS TO QUALIFY FOR DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE AS A MEMBER WITHOUT DEPENDENTS UNDER JTR M9001-2. IS WITHOUT LEGAL AUTHORITY TO ALLOW THIS CLAIM SINCE JTR M9004-2-1 EXPRESSLY PROVIDES THAT DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE IS NOT PAYABLE WHERE PERMANENT CHANGE-OF-STATION TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED UNDER THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN JTR M7000. WHERE YOUR WIFE AND CHILDREN WERE RESIDING WHILE YOU WERE OVERSEAS. THAT YOU WERE ATTACHED TO FORT CAMPBELL EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 25. YOU WERE NOTIFIED THAT YOUR REQUEST WAS APPROVED AND BY PARAGRAPH 128. YOUR PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION WAS AUTHORIZED FROM VIETNAM TO FORT SHERIDAN. YOUR CLAIM FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS AND DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE WAS DISALLOWED FOR THE REASON THAT YOUR DEPENDENTS TRAVELED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF YOUR CHANGE-OF-STATION ORDERS.

B-174884, FEB 14, 1972

MILITARY PERSONNEL - DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE - ENTITLEMENT DECISION DENYING THE CLAIM OF STAFF SGT. MARTIN L. DORNAN, SR., FOR DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE INCIDENT TO A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION AS A MEMBER OF THE ARMY. CLAIMANT WAS DENIED REIMBURSEMENT FOR DEPENDENT TRAVEL PURSUANT TO JTR M7000-8 AND NOW SEEKS TO QUALIFY FOR DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE AS A MEMBER WITHOUT DEPENDENTS UNDER JTR M9001-2. THE COMP. GEN. IS WITHOUT LEGAL AUTHORITY TO ALLOW THIS CLAIM SINCE JTR M9004-2-1 EXPRESSLY PROVIDES THAT DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE IS NOT PAYABLE WHERE PERMANENT CHANGE-OF-STATION TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED UNDER THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN JTR M7000, ITEMS 2 THROUGH 6 INCLUSIVE, 8, 9, 11, AND 12.

TO STAFF SERGEANT MARTIN L. DORNAN:

YOUR CLAIM FOR DEPENDENT TRAVEL AND DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE INCIDENT TO YOUR PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FROM VIETNAM TO FORT SHERIDAN, ILLINOIS, HAS BEEN FORWARDED HERE BY LETTER DATED DECEMBER 27, 1971, OF CAPTAIN RUSSELL J. HEIPLE, FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING OFFICER, U.S. ARMY AREA SUPPORT COMMAND, 1819 WEST PERSHING ROAD, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, FOR CONSIDERATION AS AN APPEAL FROM THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM BY THE FINANCE CENTER, U.S. ARMY, INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT YOU DEPARTED FROM THE REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM ON AUGUST 27, 1970, ON EMERGENCY LEAVE TO FORT CAMPBELL, KENTUCKY, WHERE YOUR WIFE AND CHILDREN WERE RESIDING WHILE YOU WERE OVERSEAS; THAT YOU WERE ATTACHED TO FORT CAMPBELL EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 25, 1970, DUE TO COURT ACTION INITIATED AGAINST YOUR WIFE; THAT ON OCTOBER 1, 1970, YOUR WIFE AND CHILDREN TRAVELED TO CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, AND THAT ON OCTOBER 6, 1970, YOU SUBMITTED A REQUEST FOR COMPASSIONATE REASSIGNMENT IN THE CHICAGO AREA. ON OCTOBER 19, 1970, YOU WERE NOTIFIED THAT YOUR REQUEST WAS APPROVED AND BY PARAGRAPH 128, SPECIAL ORDERS NO. 359, DATED DECEMBER 25, 1970, YOUR PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION WAS AUTHORIZED FROM VIETNAM TO FORT SHERIDAN, ILLINOIS.

YOUR CLAIM FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS AND DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE WAS DISALLOWED FOR THE REASON THAT YOUR DEPENDENTS TRAVELED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF YOUR CHANGE-OF-STATION ORDERS, CITING OUR DECISION B 132577, AUGUST 12, 1957, COPY HEREWITH, IN WHICH WE HELD THAT A RIGHT TO PAYMENT OF SUCH ALLOWANCES CANNOT ARISE UNTIL A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION HAS BEEN ORDERED AND THE MEMBER'S DEPENDENTS ACTUALLY MOVE IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH CHANGE OF STATION. CAPTAIN HEIPLE ADVISED THAT YOU SUBMIT TO THE DECISION OF THE FINANCE OFFICE AS IT AFFECTS DEPENDENT TRAVEL, BUT THAT YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH THE DECISION AS IT AFFECTS DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE.

IT APPEARS TO BE YOUR BELIEF THAT, WHILE YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE AS A MEMBER WITH DEPENDENTS DUE TO THE EARLY TRAVEL OF YOUR WIFE AND CHILDREN, YOU ARE ENTITLED TO SUCH ALLOWANCE AS A MEMBER WITHOUT DEPENDENTS. THE PREMISE UPON WHICH YOU CLAIM ENTITLEMENT IS THAT PARAGRAPH M9001-2, JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, DEFINES THE TERM "MEMBER WITHOUT DEPENDENTS" AS A MEMBER WHO HAS NO DEPENDENTS OR WHO IS NOT ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH M7000 IN CONNECTION WITH A CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION AND YOU ARE EXPRESSLY DENIED TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE UNDER PARAGRAPH M7000-8, WHICH PROVIDES THAT MEMBERS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO DEPENDENT TRAVEL FOR ANY TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS PERFORMED AT PERSONAL EXPENSE PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ORDERS DIRECTING PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION. THUS, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT YOU EXACTLY FULFILL THE DESCRIPTION OF A MEMBER WITHOUT DEPENDENTS.

A MEMBER OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES IS ENTITLED TO A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 37 U.S.C. 407 UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES THERE DESCRIBED. EXCEPT FOR A MEMBER WHOSE DEPENDENTS MAY NOT MAKE AN AUTHORIZED MOVE IN CONNECTION WITH A CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION, A MEMBER WITH DEPENDENTS MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED A MEMBER WITHOUT DEPENDENTS. FURTHERMORE, PARAGRAPH M9004-2-1 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS SPECIFICALLY PROVIDES THAT THE DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE IS NOT PAYABLE TO A MEMBER WITH DEPENDENTS IN CONNECTION WITH PERMANENT CHANGE OF-STATION TRAVEL PERFORMED UNDER THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN PARAGRAPH M7000, ITEMS 2 THROUGH 6 INCLUSIVE, 8, 9, 11 AND 12.

UNDER THE PLAIN TERMS OF THE LAW AND REGULATIONS, A MEMBER IS NOT ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OR DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE WHERE DEPENDENTS DEPART THE OLD PERMANENT STATION PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CHANGE-OF-STATION ORDERS EXCEPT WHERE THE VOUCHER IS SUPPORTED BY A STATEMENT OF THE COMMANDING OFFICER, OR HIS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE, OF THE HEADQUARTERS ISSUING THE CHANGE-OF-STATION ORDERS THAT THE MEMBER WAS ADVISED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE CHANGE-OF-STATION ORDERS THAT SUCH ORDERS WOULD BE ISSUED. SEE PARAGRAPH M7003-4, JTR.

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, AND WHILE WE APPRECIATE THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT NECESSITATED YOUR DEPENDENTS' EARLY TRAVEL AND YOUR PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FOR HUMANITARIAN REASONS, WE ARE WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO WAIVE OR MAKE EXCEPTIONS TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW AND REGULATIONS. SINCE A CERTIFICATE REQUIRED BY THE REGULATIONS HAS NOT BEEN AND APPARENTLY CANNOT BE ISSUED, YOUR CASE FALLS SQUARELY WITHIN OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 12, 1957, AND THERE IS NO LEGAL BASIS FOR THE PAYMENT OF YOUR CLAIM.