B-30169, DECEMBER 19, 1942, 22 COMP. GEN. 555

B-30169: Dec 19, 1942

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

WHICH TRAVEL WAS NOT COVERED BY THE ORDERS. WAS TRAVEL BY A CIVILIAN NOT IN THE SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES AND WAS NOT TRAVEL BY AN OFFICER FOR WHICH MILEAGE IS PAYABLE. WHERE A NAVAL RESERVE OFFICER WAS SHOWN HIS ACTIVE DUTY ORDERS AT A PLACE OTHER THAN THE PLACE OF HIS HOME. - TO WHICH THE ORDERS WERE ADDRESSED AND FROM WHICH THE ORDERS REQUIRED HIM TO TRAVEL TO A DESIGNATED TEMPORARY STATION. - AND THE ORDERS WERE LATER DELIVERED TO HIM AT ANOTHER PLACE EN ROUTE TO THE TEMPORARY STATION. THE TRAVEL TO THE TEMPORARY STATION FROM THE PLACE HE WAS SHOWN HIS ORDERS PRIOR TO THE TIME THEY WERE ACTUALLY DELIVERED TO HIM IS CONSIDERED AS TRAVEL IN COMPLIANCE WITH KNOWN WRITTEN ORDERS FOR WHICH MILEAGE IS PAYABLE NOT IN EXCESS OF THE MILEAGE WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN PAYABLE HAD HE RECEIVED THE ORDERS AT HIS HOME AND TRAVELED IN STRICT ACCORDANCE THEREWITH.

B-30169, DECEMBER 19, 1942, 22 COMP. GEN. 555

NAVAL AND MARINE CORPS RESERVISTS - MILEAGE; TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS TRAVEL PERFORMED BY AN APPLICANT FOR A COMMISSION IN THE NAVAL RESERVE TO ACCEPT THE COMMISSION AND TO RECEIVE HIS ACTIVE DUTY ORDERS, WHICH TRAVEL WAS NOT COVERED BY THE ORDERS, WAS TRAVEL BY A CIVILIAN NOT IN THE SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES AND WAS NOT TRAVEL BY AN OFFICER FOR WHICH MILEAGE IS PAYABLE. WHERE A NAVAL RESERVE OFFICER WAS SHOWN HIS ACTIVE DUTY ORDERS AT A PLACE OTHER THAN THE PLACE OF HIS HOME--- TO WHICH THE ORDERS WERE ADDRESSED AND FROM WHICH THE ORDERS REQUIRED HIM TO TRAVEL TO A DESIGNATED TEMPORARY STATION--- AND THE ORDERS WERE LATER DELIVERED TO HIM AT ANOTHER PLACE EN ROUTE TO THE TEMPORARY STATION, THE TRAVEL TO THE TEMPORARY STATION FROM THE PLACE HE WAS SHOWN HIS ORDERS PRIOR TO THE TIME THEY WERE ACTUALLY DELIVERED TO HIM IS CONSIDERED AS TRAVEL IN COMPLIANCE WITH KNOWN WRITTEN ORDERS FOR WHICH MILEAGE IS PAYABLE NOT IN EXCESS OF THE MILEAGE WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN PAYABLE HAD HE RECEIVED THE ORDERS AT HIS HOME AND TRAVELED IN STRICT ACCORDANCE THEREWITH. IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE THAT A NAVAL OR MARINE CORPS RESERVIST WHO IS APPOINTED OR ENLISTED AND IMMEDIATELY PLACED ON ACTIVE DUTY ACTUALLY HAS HIS HOME AT A PLACE OTHER THAN THAT SHOWN BY THE OFFICIAL RECORDS TO BE HIS HOME, OR "OFFICIAL RESIDENCE," PAYMENT, OTHERWISE PROPER, OF THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM SUCH HOME OF OFFICIAL RECORD TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION WILL NOT BE QUESTIONED, EVEN THOUGH HIS HOME BE AT A POINT MORE DISTANT THAN THE PLACE OF ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT OR ACCEPTANCE FOR ENLISTMENT. 21 COMP. GEN. 1010 WILL NO LONGER BE FOLLOWED. WHERE A NAVAL RESERVE APPOINTEE, WHOSE ORDERS DIRECTED HIM TO TAKE HIS PHYSICAL EXAMINATION AT THE PLACE OF HIS HOME AND, IF FOUND PHYSICALLY QUALIFIED, TO REPORT TO A DESIGNATED PLACE FOR ACTIVE DUTY, DID NOT EXECUTE THE ACCEPTANCE OF HIS COMMISSION AND OATH OF OFFICE UNTIL HE WAS EN ROUTE TO HIS DUTY STATION, THE OFFICER MAY BE REGARDED AS HAVING ACCEPTED HIS COMMISSION WHEN HE BEGAN TRAVEL FROM HIS HOME IN COMPLIANCE WITH HIS ORDERS SO AS TO ENTITLE HIM TO MILEAGE FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED FROM HIS HOME TO HIS FIRST DUTY STATION. A NAVAL RESERVE OFFICER'S RIGHT TO PAYMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION FROM HIS HOME WHEN ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE FACT THAT, WHILE ON TEMPORARY DUTY AND PRIOR TO THE TIME HIS DEPENDENTS TRAVELED FROM HIS HOME TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION, HE CHANGED HIS OFFICIAL ADDRESS FROM HIS HOME TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION. WHERE A NAVAL RESERVE OFFICER'S ORDERS, DIRECTING HIM TO PERFORM TEMPORARY DUTY PRIOR TO REPORTING TO A DESIGNATED STATION FOR PERMANENT DUTY, WERE IN EXISTENCE, AND WERE NOT LATER REVOKED, AT THE TIME HIS DEPENDENTS TRAVELED FROM HIS HOME TO HIS PERMANENT DUTY STATION, THE FACT THAT THE TRAVEL WAS COMMENCED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF HIS DETACHMENT FROM TEMPORARY DUTY DOES NOT AFFECT HIS RIGHT TO BE PAID THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS. WHERE A NAVAL RESERVE OFFICER'S DEPENDENT WIFE TRAVELED TO THE OFFICER'S FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION FROM A PLACE OTHER THAN THE PLACE WHICH WAS HIS OFFICIAL HOME OR RESIDENCE OF RECORD AT THE TIME HE WAS ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY AND TO WHICH HIS ORDERS WERE ADDRESSED, THE OFFICER IS ENTITLED TO PAYMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENT TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION FROM THE PLACE FROM WHICH THE TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED, NOT TO EXCEED WHAT SUCH TRANSPORTATION WOULD HAVE COST FROM THE SAID OFFICIAL RESIDENCE OR HOME OF RECORD. WHERE AN INDIVIDUAL'S APPOINTMENT AS A NAVAL RESERVE OFFICER AND ORDERS TO ACTIVE DUTY, ADDRESSED TO HIM AT HIS HOME, WERE RECEIVED BY HIM AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED IN HIS ORDERS AS HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION, TO WHICH PLACE HE AND HIS DEPENDENT WIFE HAD PREVIOUSLY TRAVELED IN ANTICIPATION OF THE APPOINTMENT AND ORDERS, NO TRAVEL ON HIS PART WAS NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDERS, AND, THEREFORE, HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO MILEAGE; NOR IS HE ENTITLED TO PAYMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS WIFE FROM HIS HOME TO HIS FIRST DUTY STATION AS HER TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED PRIOR TO HIS APPOINTMENT AND THE ISSUANCE OF HIS ORDERS.

ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL ELLIOTT TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, DECEMBER 19, 1942:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 6, 1942, AS FOLLOWS:

THERE IS TRANSMITTED HEREWITH A LETTER FROM THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, NAVY DEPARTMENT, DATED OCTOBER 29, 1942, WITH ENCLOSURE OF FIVE CLAIMS COVERING MILEAGE AND TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS IN THE CASES OF LIEUTENANT NEWTON W. BUERGER, LIEUTENANT (J.G.) DAVID C. SCOTT, ENSIGN TYRUS BAIN, ENSIGN GEORGE F. BAUGHMAN, AND HOKE S. ALMOND, YEOMAN SECOND CLASS, ALL OF THE U.S. NAVAL RESERVE.

IT IS CORRECTLY STATED IN THE ENCLOSED LETTER FROM THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL THAT IN DECISIONS OF MAY 12, 1942, AND SEPTEMBER 22, 1942, B- 25083, THE ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL HELD THAT WHEN AN OFFICER OR AN ENLISTED MAN IS APPOINTED OR ENLISTED, RESPECTIVELY, IN THE NAVAL RESERVE AND IS IMMEDIATELY PLACED ON ACTIVE DUTY, THE PLACE WHERE HE WAS WHEN ACCEPTED FOR APPOINTMENT OR ENLISTMENT IS THE PLACE FROM WHICH HE IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION; AND FURTHER, THAT THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS FOR TRANSPORTATION OF THE DEPENDENTS OF RESERVE PERSONNEL, WHEN SUCH PERSONNEL ARE ACCEPTED FOR APPOINTMENT OR ENLISTMENT AND IMMEDIATELY PLACED ON ACTIVE DUTY, WERE NOT INTENDED AS AUTHORIZING TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS FOR A DISTANCE ANY GREATER THAN THAT FROM WHICH THE OFFICER OR ENLISTED MAN IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR HIS OWN TRAVEL IN REPORTING FOR ACTIVE DUTY.

HOWEVER, YOU WILL NOTE FROM THE ENCLOSED LETTER OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL THAT THE ABOVE CITED DECISIONS OF THE ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL DO NOT COVER CERTAIN ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AS PRESENTED IN THE CLAIMS TRANSMITTED HEREWITH. THE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS RAISED WITH RESPECT TO EACH OF THESE CLAIMS ARE SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH 3, 4, 5, 6, AND 7, RESPECTIVELY, OF THE ENCLOSED LETTER FROM THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL. YOUR PARTICULAR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO THE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THUS PRESENTED BY THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL WITH REQUEST FOR YOUR DECISIONS THEREON.

THE LETTER OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, REFERRED TO IN YOUR LETTER IS, IN PART, AS FOLLOWS:

SUBJECT: TRANSPORTATION OF NAVAL RESERVE PERSONNEL AND DEPENDENTS INCIDENT TO APPOINTMENT OR ENLISTMENT AND IMMEDIATE CALL TO ACTIVE DUTY.

REFERENCE: (A) DECISION OF THE ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL, B 25083, OF MAY 12, 1942. (B) DECISION OF THE ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL, B-25083, OF SEPTEMBER 22, 1942.

ENCLOSURE: (A) CLAIM OF LIEUT. NEWTON W. BUERGER, USNR. (B) CLAIM OF HOKE S. ALMOND, Y2C, USNR. (C) CLAIM OF LIEUT. (JG) DAVID C. SCOTT, USNR. (D) CLAIM OF ENSIGN TYRUS BAIN, USNR. (E) CLAIM OF ENSIGN GEORGE F. BAUGHMAN, (SC) USNR.

1. IN REFERENCES (A) AND (B) THE ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER HAS HELD THAT WHEN AN OFFICER OR ENLISTED MAN IS APPOINTED OR ENLISTED IN THE NAVAL OR MARINE CORPS RESERVE, AND IMMEDIATELY PLACED ON ACTIVE DUTY, THE PLACE WHERE HE WAS WHEN ACCEPTED FOR APPOINTMENT OR ENLISTMENT IS THE PLACE FROM WHICH HE IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION. HE HAS ALSO HELD THAT THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS FOR TRANSPORTATION OF THE DEPENDENTS OF RESERVE PERSONNEL WHEN SUCH PERSONNEL ARE ACCEPTED FOR APPOINTMENT OR ENLISTMENT AND IMMEDIATELY PLACED ON ACTIVE DUTY, WERE NOT INTENDED AS AUTHORIZING TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS FOR ANY GREATER DISTANCE THAN THE DISTANCE FROM WHICH THE OFFICER OR MAN IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR HIS OWN TRAVEL IN REPORTING FOR ACTIVE DUTY.

2. A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF CLAIMS ARE ON HAND INVOLVING TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS OF OFFICERS AND MEN INCIDENT TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT OR ENLISTMENT AND IMMEDIATE CALL TO ACTIVE DUTY. A NUMBER OF THESE CASES, ALTHOUGH COVERED GENERALLY BY THE RULINGS CONTAINED IN REFERENCES, NEVERTHELESS, INVOLVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. THE PERTINENT POINTS INVOLVED IN ENCLOSURES WILL, THEREFORE, BE CONSIDERED IN ORDER, AND IT IS DESIRED THAT THEY BE SUBMITTED TO THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL WITH THE REQUEST THAT THE QUESTIONS RAISED BE CLARIFIED AND THIS BUREAU INFORMED ACCORDINGLY.

THE REMAINING PARAGRAPHS OF THE ABOVE LETTER ARE SEPARATELY QUOTED AND DISCUSSED BELOW.

CLAIM OF LIEUTENANT NEWTON W. BUERGER.

3. IT WILL BE NOTED IN ENCLOSURE (A) THAT LIEUT. BUERGER WAS NOTIFIED BY TELEPHONE TO PROCEED FROM KINGSTON, ONTARIO, TO BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS IN ORDER TO RECEIVE HIS COMMISSION AND ORDERS. UPON ARRIVAL AT BOSTON HE EXECUTED THE ACCEPTANCE AND OATH OF OFFICE AND WAS VERBALLY DIRECTED TO PROCEED TO NEW YORK, NEW YORK FOR PHYSICAL EXAMINATION AND DELIVERY OF ACTIVE DUTY ORDERS. HE WAS FOUND PHYSICALLY QUALIFIED AT NEW YORK, NEW YORK ON JUNE 17, 1942, AND REPORTED FOR TEMPORARY DUTY AT FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK ON JUNE 18, 1942. ORDERS OF AUGUST 8, 1942 DIRECTED HIS TRANSFER FROM FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK TO WASHINGTON D.C. FOR DUTY, AND ORDERS OF AUGUST 19, 1942 EFFECTED A FURTHER TRANSFER FROM WASHINGTON, D.C. TO ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND FOR DUTY. MILEAGE FOR THIS OFFICER'S TRAVEL FROM FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK TO WASHINGTON, D.C., THENCE TO ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND HAS BEEN PAID. NO PAYMENT, HOWEVER, HAS BEEN MADE FOR ANY TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS. BETWEEN WHAT POINTS IS LIEUT. BUERGER ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS, ALSO, IS HE ENTITLED TO ANY ADDITIONAL MILEAGE FOR HIS PERSONAL TRAVEL?

IN ADDITION TO THE FACTS STATED IN THE ABOVE QUOTED PARAGRAPH, IT APPEARS THAT LIEUTENANT BUERGER APPLIED FOR A COMMISSION IN THE NAVAL RESERVE THROUGH HEADQUARTERS, FIRST NAVAL DISTRICT; THAT HIS OFFICIAL RESIDENCE OF RECORD WHEN HIS COMMISSION AND ORDERS TO ACTIVE DUTY WERE ISSUED WAS WATERTOWN, NEW YORK, AND THAT HIS DEPENDENTS TRAVELED FROM WATERTOWN TO ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND, ON AUGUST 24 AND 25, 1942. IT FURTHER APPEARS THAT LIEUTENANT BUERGER'S APPOINTMENT, DATED JUNE 1, 1942, WAS ADDRESSED TO HIM SIMPLY VIA THE DIRECTOR OF NAVAL OFFICER PROCUREMENT, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, WHILE HIS ORDERS TO ACTIVE DUTY, DATED JUNE 2, 1942, WERE ADDRESSED TO HIM AT WATERTOWN, NEW YORK, VIA THE DIRECTOR OF NAVAL OFFICER PROCUREMENT, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, AND VIA THE COMMANDANT, THIRD NAVAL DISTRICT. THESE ORDERS DIRECTED BUERGER, UPON ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT, TO TAKE A PHYSICAL EXAMINATION AT SUCH PLACE AS THE LATTER OFFICER MIGHT DESIGNATE, AND IF FOUND QUALIFIED TO REPORT AT FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK, ON JUNE 18, 1942, FOR TEMPORARY ACTIVE DUTY. THE OFFICER STATES THAT " LT. COMDR. MADDEN ASKED ME TO COME TO BOSTON TO RECEIVE THE ORDERS THERE," THAT HE ACCEPTED HIS COMMISSION IN BOSTON ON JUNE 4, 1942, AND WAS ALLOWED TO READ HIS ORDERS TO ACTIVE DUTY, WHICH WERE THEN FORWARDED TO HEADQUARTERS, THIRD NAVAL DISTRICT.

LIEUTENANT BUERGER'S TRAVEL FROM KINGSTON, ONTARIO, TO BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, WAS PRIOR TO HIS ACCEPTANCE OF COMMISSION IN THE NAVAL RESERVE AND WAS NOT COVERED BY HIS ACTIVE DUTY ORDERS, BUT WAS FOR THE PURPOSE OF RETURNING TO THE UNITED STATES TO ACCEPT THE COMMISSION AS A RESERVE OFFICER, ON WHICH THE ACTIVE DUTY ORDERS WERE CONTINGENT. IT WAS TRAVEL BY A CIVILIAN NOT IN THE SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES AND WAS NOT TRAVEL BY AN OFFICER UNDER COMPETENT ORDERS FOR WHICH MILEAGE IS PAYABLE, A-11560, AUGUST 15, 1927; CF. 21 COMP. GEN. 819.

WHILE IN BOSTON, LIEUTENANT BUERGER WAS SHOWN HIS WRITTEN ORDERS, ADDRESSED TO HIM AT WATERTOWN, NEW YORK, DIRECTING HIM, UPON ACCEPTANCE OF COMMISSION, TO REPORT FOR PHYSICAL EXAMINATION AT A PLACE TO BE DESIGNATED AND, IF FOUND PHYSICALLY QUALIFIED, TO PROCEED TO FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK, FOR ACTIVE DUTY. HE TRAVELED FROM BOSTON TO NEW YORK, WAS DIRECTED TO TAKE PHYSICAL EXAMINATION AT THE LATTER CITY, WAS FOUND PHYSICALLY QUALIFIED AND PROCEEDED THENCE TO FORT SCHUYLER. WHILE THE ORDERS DID NOT DIRECT TRAVEL TO NEW YORK, THEY DID DIRECT THE OFFICER, IF FOUND PHYSICALLY QUALIFIED, TO REPORT AT FORT SCHUYLER, A NEARBY POINT. TRAVEL FROM BOSTON TO NEW YORK WAS TRAVEL EN ROUTE TO THE FIRST DUTY STATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH KNOWN WRITTEN ORDERS, CONDITIONAL UPON BEING FOUND PHYSICALLY QUALIFIED, WHICH CONDITION WAS MET. IT IS STATED THAT THE OFFICER HAS BEEN ALLOWED MILEAGE FROM FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK, TO WASHINGTON, D.C., AND FROM WASHINGTON TO ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND. ON THE FACTS STATED, HE IS ENTITLED TO ADDITIONAL MILEAGE FROM BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, TO FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK, VIA NEW YORK, NEW YORK, NOT TO EXCEED MILEAGE FROM WATERTOWN, NEW YORK, HIS HOME, TO FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK, WHICH WAS THE ONLY TRAVEL ORDERED UNDER COMPETENT ORDERS.

A VOUCHER IS SUBMITTED FOR THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE TRAVEL OF LIEUTENANT BUERGER'S DEPENDENTS (WIFE AND TWO CHILDREN) FROM WATERTOWN, NEW YORK, HIS HOME WHEN ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY, TO ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND, HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION. THE DECISION B 25083, MAY 12, 1942, 21 COMP. GEN. 1010, RECONSIDERED SEPTEMBER 22, 1942, CITED IN YOUR LETTER, INVOLVED CASES AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS PRIOR TO THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, AND IT WAS HELD THAT WHEN A MEMBER OF THE NAVAL RESERVE OR OF THE MARINE CORPS RESERVE IS ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY IMMEDIATELY UPON APPOINTMENT OR ENLISTMENT, THE TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION FROM A POINT MORE DISTANT THAN THE PLACE OF ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT OR OF ACCEPTANCE FOR ENLISTMENT IS NOT AUTHORIZED. HOWEVER, PARAGRAPHS 5 AND 6 OF SECTION 12 OF THE SAID PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, PUBLIC LAW 607, APPROVED JUNE 16, 1942, 56 STAT. 364 PROVIDE:

WHEN ANY OFFICER, WARRANT OFFICER, OR ENLISTED MAN ABOVE THE FOURTH GRADE, HAVING DEPENDENTS AS DEFINED IN SECTION 4 HEREOF, IS ORDERED TO MAKE A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, THE UNITED STATES SHALL FURNISH TRANSPORTATION IN KIND FROM FUNDS APPROPRIATED FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE ARMY, THE NAVY, THE MARINE CORPS, THE COAST GUARD, THE COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY, AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE TO HIS NEW STATION FOR SUCH DEPENDENTS: PROVIDED, THAT FOR PERSONS IN THE NAVAL SERVICE THE TERM "PERMANENT STATION" AS USED IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE INTERPRETED TO MEAN A SHORE STATION OR THE HOME YARD OR HOME PORT OF THE VESSEL TO WHICH THE PERSON CONCERNED MAY BE ORDERED; AND A DULY AUTHORIZED CHANGE IN HOME YARD OR HOME PORT OF SUCH VESSEL SHALL BE DEEMED A CHANGE OF STATION: PROVIDED FURTHER, THAT IF THE COST OF SUCH TRANSPORTATION EXCEEDS THAT FOR TRANSPORTATION FROM THE OLD TO THE NEW STATION, THE EXCESS COST SHALL BE PAID TO THE UNITED STATES BY THE OFFICER, WARRANT OFFICER, OR ENLISTED MAN CONCERNED: PROVIDED FURTHER, THAT TRANSPORTATION SUPPLIED THE DEPENDENTS OF SUCH OFFICER, WARRANT OFFICER, OR ENLISTED MAN, TO OR FROM STATIONS BEYOND THE CONTINENTAL LIMITS OF THE UNITED STATES, SHALL NOT BE OTHER THAN BY GOVERNMENT TRANSPORT, IF SUCH TRANSPORTATION IS AVAILABLE AS MAY BE DETERMINED BY THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT CONCERNED: PROVIDED FURTHER, THAT THE PERSONNEL OF ALL THE SERVICES MENTIONED IN THE TITLE OF THIS ACT SHALL HAVE THE BENEFIT OF ALL EXISTING LAWS APPLYING TO THE ARMY AND MARINE CORPS FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS: AND PROVIDED FURTHER, THAT IN LIEU OF TRANSPORTATION IN KIND AUTHORIZED BY THIS SECTION FOR DEPENDENTS, THE PRESIDENT MAY AUTHORIZE THE PAYMENT IN MONEY OF AMOUNTS EQUAL TO SUCH COMMERCIAL TRANSPORTATION COSTS FOR THE WHOLE OR SUCH PART OF THE TRAVEL FOR WHICH TRANSPORTATION IN KIND IS NOT FURNISHED WHEN SUCH TRAVEL SHALL HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.

THE WORDS "PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION" AS USED IN THIS SECTION SHALL INCLUDE THE CHANGE FROM HOME TO FIRST STATION AND FROM LAST STATION TO HOME WHEN ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY OTHER THAN TRAINING DUTY, OF ANY OFFICER, WARRANT OFFICER, NURSE, OR ENLISTED MAN OF ANY OF THE SERVICES MENTIONED IN THE TITLE OF THIS ACT, INCLUDING RETIRED PERSONNEL AND MEMBERS OF THE RESERVE COMPONENTS THEREOF, IN A GRADE FOR WHICH THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS IS AUTHORIZED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE, AND THE CHANGE FROM LAST STATION TO HOME IN CONNECTION WITH RETIREMENT, RELIEF FROM ACTIVE DUTY, OR TRANSFER TO A RESERVE COMPONENT.

IN VIEW OF THESE PROVISIONS--- WHICH APPEAR TO BE LARGELY A CONSOLIDATION AND CLARIFICATION OF VARIOUS PREEXISTING STATUTORY PROVISIONS FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS--- AND AS EXPRESS PROVISION IS MADE THEREIN FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OF RESERVE PERSONNEL FROM "HOME TO FIRST STATION," THE SAID DECISION OF MAY 12, 1942, WILL NO LONGER BE FOLLOWED. IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE THAT A RESERVIST APPOINTED OR ENLISTED AND IMMEDIATELY CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY ACTUALLY HAD HIS HOME AT ANOTHER PLACE, THE PAYMENT OF THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM THE PLACE SHOWN BY THE OFFICIAL RECORDS TO BE HIS HOME, OR "OFFICIAL RESIDENCE," WHEN ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY WILL NOT BE QUESTIONED, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.

ON THE FACTS STATED, IT APPEARS THAT THE OFFICIAL RESIDENCE OR HOME OF LIEUTENANT BUERGER, WHEN ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY, WAS WATERTOWN, NEW YORK, AND HE IS ENTITLED TO THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS, PURSUANT TO THE STATUTE, FROM THAT PLACE TO ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND, HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION. CLAIM OF HOKE SMITH ALMOND, YEOMAN SECOND-CLASS.

4. IN ENCLOSURE (B) ALMOND WAS ACCEPTED FOR ENLISTMENT AT ATLANTA, GEORGIA AND FURNISHED TRANSPORTATION AS AN APPLICANT FROM ATLANTA TO MACON, GEORGIA WHERE HE WAS ENLISTED ON FEBRUARY 26, 1942, AND IMMEDIATELY PLACED ON ACTIVE DUTY. ORDERS OF FEBRUARY 26, 1942, AND MARCH 29, 1942 EFFECTED HIS TRANSFER TO PERMANENT DUTY AT YORKTOWN, VIRGINIA. IS THIS MAN ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS FROM ATLANTA, GEORGIA TO YORKTOWN, VIRGINIA OR FROM MACON, GEORGIA TO YORKTOWN? HIS HOME ADDRESS AND ADDRESS OF DEPENDENTS AS SHOWN ON THE SHIPPING ARTICLE AT TIME OF ENLISTMENT IS 183 NORTH AVENUE, N.E., ATLANTA, GEORGIA. IF ALMOND HAD SHOWN HIS HOME ADDRESS AND LOCATION OF DEPENDENTS TO BE AT A PLACE OTHER THAN ATLANTA OR MACON, INVOLVING A GREATER COST TO THE NEW STATION, WOULD SUCH LOCATION HAVE ANY EFFECT IN ESTABLISHING THE INITIAL POINT FROM WHICH TRANSPORTATION WOULD BE AUTHORIZED?

ALMOND'S HOME WHEN HE ENLISTED AND WAS PLACED ON ACTIVE DUTY AS A YEOMAN, SECOND-CLASS, U.S. NAVAL RESERVE, IS SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN ATLANTA, GEORGIA, AND, ON THE FACTS STATED, HE IS ENTITLED TO THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENT (WIFE) FROM THAT POINT TO YORKTOWN, VIRGINIA, HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION. HAD HIS OFFICIAL RESIDENCE OR HOME BEEN AT SOME OTHER PLACE WHEN HE WAS ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY HE WOULD HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM SUCH OTHER PLACE TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT STATION.

CLAIM OF LIEUTENANT (JG) DAVID C. SCOTT, JR.

5. IN ENCLOSURE (C) LIEUT. SCOTT'S ORDERS OF JUNE 3, 1942, WERE ADDRESSED TO HIM AT PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND, HIS OFFICIAL ADDRESS OF RECORD AT THAT TIME. HE RECEIVED THE ORDERS AT WASHINGTON, D.C. ON JUNE 10, 1942, AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FIRST ENDORSEMENT THEREON PROCEEDED TO PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND AND WAS FOUND PHYSICALLY QUALIFIED FOR ACTIVE DUTY AT THAT PLACE ON JUNE 15, 1942. THE ACCEPTANCE AND OATH OF OFFICE WAS EXECUTED AT NEW YORK, NEW YORK ON JUNE 17, 1942. UNDER DATE OF JUNE 29, 1942 HIS OFFICIAL ADDRESS WAS CHANGED FROM PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND TO WASHINGTON, D.C. UPON COMPLETION OF TEMPORARY DUTY AT FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK HE REPORTED AT WASHINGTON, D.C. FOR PERMANENT DUTY ON AUGUST 15, 1942 AND WAS PAID MILEAGE FOR PERSONAL TRAVEL AMOUNTING TO $35.52. IS LIEUT. SCOTT ENTITLED TO THE MILEAGE PAID, PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND TO WASHINGTON, D.C., VIA FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK AND TO TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS FROM PROVIDENCE TO WASHINGTON, DIRECT?

COPIES OF LIEUTENANT SCOTT'S ACCEPTANCE OF COMMISSION AND OATH OF OFFICE DO NOT APPEAR IN THE FILE. AS STATED IN THE ABOVE-QUOTED PARAGRAPH, HIS ORDERS OF JUNE 3, 1942, WERE ADDRESSED TO HIM AT PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND, AND DIRECTED HIM TO TAKE A PHYSICAL EXAMINATION AT THAT PLACE. THE ORDERS FURTHER DIRECTED HIM, IF FOUND PHYSICALLY QUALIFIED, TO REPORT AT FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK, FOR TEMPORARY ACTIVE DUTY AND, UPON COMPLETION OF SUCH DUTY, TO REPORT AT WASHINGTON, D.C., FOR ACTIVE DUTY. NO DATE OF DETACHMENT FROM FORT SCHUYLER OR OF REPORTING AT WASHINGTON WAS SPECIFIED BY HIS ORDERS. HE REPORTED AT FORT SCHUYLER JUNE 18, 1942, WAS DETACHED FROM THERE AUGUST 14, 1942, AND REPORTED AT WASHINGTON, AUGUST 15, 1942.

IT IS STATED THAT LIEUTENANT SCOTT EXECUTED THE ACCEPTANCE OF HIS COMMISSION AND OATH OF OFFICE AT NEW YORK, NEW YORK, APPARENTLY WHILE EN ROUTE FROM PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND, THE PLACE OF PHYSICAL EXAMINATION, TO FORT SCHUYLER, NEW YORK, THE FIRST DUTY STATION. AN OFFICER IS NOT ENTITLED TO MILEAGE FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED PRIOR TO HIS ACCEPTANCE OF COMMISSION, SUCH TRAVEL BEING PERFORMED IN A CIVILIAN CAPACITY. A-11560, AUGUST 15, 1927; CF. CASE OF LIEUTENANT BUERGER, SUPRA. IT IS RECOGNIZED, HOWEVER, THAT THERE MAY BE AN ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT BY CONDUCT--- BY ENTERING UPON THE DUTIES OF AN OFFICE IN COMPLIANCE WITH PROPER ORDERS. IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHEN AN APPOINTEE, WITH KNOWLEDGE THAT HIS COMMISSION HAS BEEN ISSUED, BEGINS TRAVEL UNDER PROPER ORDERS TO HIS FIRST DUTY STATION, HE ENTERS UPON THE DUTIES OF HIS OFFICE AND ACCEPTS HIS COMMISSION BY CONDUCT. 21 COMP. GEN. 819. LIEUTENANT SCOTT'S ORDERS INFORMED HIM THAT HIS APPOINTMENT HAD BEEN ISSUED AND HE MAY BE REGARDED AS HAVING ACCEPTED IT WHEN HE BEGAN TRAVEL FROM PROVIDENCE IN COMPLIANCE WITH HIS ORDERS ADDRESSED TO HIM AT THAT PLACE AND DIRECTING HIM TO REPORT AT FORT SCHUYLER. ACCORDINGLY, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT, IT APPEARS HE WAS ENTITLED TO THE MILEAGE STATED TO HAVE BEEN PAID HIM, NAMELY, FROM PROVIDENCE TO WASHINGTON, VIA FORT SCHUYLER.

IT IS STATED THAT WHEN LIEUTENANT SCOTT'S ORDERS WERE ISSUED ON JUNE 3, 1942, HIS OFFICIAL ADDRESS OF RECORD WAS PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND. IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT ON JUNE 29, 1942 (WHILE SERVING ON TEMPORARY DUTY FOR AN INDEFINITE PERIOD AT FORT SCHUYLER), HIS OFFICIAL ADDRESS WAS CHANGED TO WASHINGTON, D.C.THE OFFICER STATES THAT HIS DEPENDENT (WIFE) BEGAN TRAVEL FROM PROVIDENCE TO WASHINGTON, D.C., HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION, ON AUGUST 13, 1942. THIS WAS SUBSEQUENT TO HIS CHANGE OF ADDRESS TO WASHINGTON, AND ONE DAY PRIOR TO HIS DETACHMENT FROM FORT SCHUYLER. HIS RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENT FROM HIS HOME TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION WAS FIXED BY HIS ORDERS TO ACTIVE DUTY AND IS NOT AFFECTED BY HIS SUBSEQUENT CHANGE OF ADDRESS DURING SUCH DUTY. CF. 19 COMP. GEN. 731, AND B-9915, MAY 9, 1940. WHILE TRAVEL WAS BEGUN BY HIS DEPENDENT FROM PROVIDENCE ONE DAY BEFORE HE WAS DETACHED FROM TEMPORARY DUTY AT FORT SCHUYLER UNDER ORDERS TO REPORT AT WASHINGTON AS HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION, SUCH ORDERS WERE IN EXISTENCE, WERE NOT LATER REVOKED, AND THE OFFICER LATER PERFORMED TRAVEL IN OBEDIENCE TO THEM. CONSEQUENTLY, HIS RIGHT TO PAYMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENT IS NOT PREJUDICED BY HER TRAVEL PRIOR TO THE DATE HIS ORDERS TO REPORT AT WASHINGTON BECAME EFFECTIVE. 4 COMP. GEN. 40. ON THE FACTS STATED, THE OFFICER IS ENTITLED TO THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENT, PURSUANT TO THE STATUTE, FOR TRAVEL FROM PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND, THE OFFICER'S HOME WHEN ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY, TO WASHINGTON, D.C., HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION.

CLAIM OF ENSIGN TYRUS BAIN.

6. IN ENCLOSURE (D) ENSIGN BAIN'S ORDERS OF MAY 27, 1942, WERE ADDRESSED TO HIM AT LUBBOCK, TEXAS, OFFICIAL RESIDENCE OF RECORD AT THAT TIME. RECEIVED THE ORDERS AT MEXIA, TEXAS ON JUNE 5, 1942 AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH FIRST ENDORSEMENT THEREON REPORTED AT DALLAS, TEXAS ON JUNE 8, 1942, WHERE HE EXECUTED THE ACCEPTANCE AND OATH OF OFFICE AS ENSIGN, USNR, AND WAS EXAMINED AND FOUND PHYSICALLY QUALIFIED FOR ACTIVE DUTY. ON THE SAME DAY HE REPORTED HIS OFFICIAL ADDRESS AS MEXIA, TEXAS, AND THE ADDRESS OF NEXT OF KIN (WIFE) AS BORGER, TEXAS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH PAR. 3 OF THE ORDERS HE PROCEEDED FROM DALLAS, TEXAS TO BORGER, TEXAS, AND FROM PAMPA, TEXAS TO ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND. IT WILL BE NOTED THAT THIS TRAVEL INVOLVED RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY ON JUNE 10, 1942, AND RECALL TO ACTIVE DUTY ON JUNE 12, 1942. UPON COMPLETION OF TEMPORARY DUTY AT ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND HE PROCEEDED TO PENSACOLA, FLORIDA AND REPORTED FOR PERMANENT DUTY ON JULY 25, 1942. THIS BUREAU IS OF THE OPINION THAT UNDER THE DECISION OF MAY 12, 1942 TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS MAY BE AUTHORIZED FROM DALLAS, TEXAS, THE PLACE OF ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT, TO PENSACOLA, FLORIDA UNLESS CONSIDERATION MAY BE GIVEN TO THE FACT THAT THE ORDERS IN QUESTION INVOLVED RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY FOR A FEW DAYS AND MAY NOT CONSTITUTE APPOINTMENT AND IMMEDIATE CALL TO ACTIVE DUTY. IF THE ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER HOLDS THAT THESE ORDERS DO NOT CONSTITUTE IMMEDIATE CALL TO ACTIVE DUTY, THEN IT WOULD APPEAR THAT TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS MAY BE AUTHORIZED FROM MEXIA, TEXAS TO PENSACOLA, FLORIDA.

ENSIGN BAIN'S ORDERS TO ACTIVE DUTY WERE ADDRESSED TO HIM AT LUBBOCK, TEXAS, HIS OFFICIAL RESIDENCE OR HOME WITHIN THE CONTEMPLATION OF SECTION 12 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 16, 1942, SUPRA, BUT IT APPEARS THAT HIS DEPENDENT (WIFE) ACTUALLY TRAVELED FROM BORGER, TEXAS, TO PENSACOLA, FLORIDA, HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION. ON THE FACTS STATED, THE OFFICER IS ENTITLED TO PAYMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION FOR HIS DEPENDENT'S ACTUAL TRAVEL FROM BORGER TO PENSACOLA, BUT NOT TO EXCEED WHAT SUCH TRANSPORTATION WOULD HAVE COST FROM LUBBOCK, HIS HOME, TO PENSACOLA.

CLAIM OF ENSIGN GEORGE F. BUAGHMAN.

7. IN ENCLOSURE (E) IT WILL BE NOTED THAT ENSIGN BAUGHMAN'S ORDERS WERE ISSUED ON APRIL 1, 1942, ADDRESSED TO HIM AT GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA. THEY WERE RECEIVED AT WASHINGTON, D.C. ON APRIL 7, 1942, WHERE HE EXECUTED THE ACCEPTANCE AND OATH OF OFFICE, AND REPORTED FOR ACTIVE DUTY THE SAME DAY. BOTH ENSIGN BAUGHMAN AND HIS DEPENDENT PERFORMED TRAVEL FROM GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA TO WASHINGTON, D.C. PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF ORDERS. THE BUREAU IS OF THE OPINION THAT HIS CASE HAS CONSIDERABLY LESS MERIT THAN ANY OF THE CLAIMS MENTIONED ABOVE. IT IS, HOWEVER, FORWARDED FOR SUCH ACTION AS MAY BE DEEMED PROPER, INASMUCH AS THE CLAIM IS ADDRESSED TO THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL.

ENSIGN BAUGHMAN ACCEPTED HIS APPOINTMENT IN WASHINGTON, D.C., AND WAS IMMEDIATELY ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY THERE. NO TRAVEL ON HIS PART WAS NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH HIS ORDERS AND HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO MILEAGE. CF. 17 COMP. GEN. 321. HIS DEPENDENT PERFORMED TRAVEL TO WASHINGTON PRIOR TO HIS APPOINTMENT AND THE ISSUANCE OF HIS ORDERS. PAYMENT OF THE COST OF SUCH TRAVEL IS NOT AUTHORIZED. 8 COMP. GEN. 334, ID. 620. ON THE FACTS PRESENTED, CLEARLY HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO MILEAGE OR THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENT (WIFE) FROM GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA, TO WASHINGTON, D.C., AND THE VOUCHERS SUBMITTED IN HIS CASE WILL BE RETAINED IN THIS OFFICE.