B-50303, AUGUST 23, 1945, 25 COMP. GEN. 220

B-50303: Aug 23, 1945

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

FROM WHICH DEPENDENTS PREVIOUSLY WERE BARRED BUT TO WHICH THEY ARE NOW PERMITTED TO TRAVEL. WHEN NAVAL PERSONNEL WHO NOW ARE PERMITTED TO HAVE THEIR DEPENDENTS AT THEIR FOREIGN STATIONS PROMPTLY APPLY FOR THE DEPENDENTS' TRANSPORTATION TO SUCH STATIONS UPON BEING INFORMED OF THE NECESSITY OF MAKING SUCH APPLICATION. FROM OCCUPYING ASSIGNED QUARTERS AT THE FOREIGN STATION SO AS TO ENTITLE SUCH PERSONNEL TO RENTAL AND QUARTERS ALLOWANCE FOR DEPENDENTS UNTIL TRANSPORTATION IS AVAILABLE AFTER THE APPLICATION IS ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED. UNDER WHICH AN OFFICER IS ENTITLED TO RENTAL ALLOWANCE AS FOR DEPENDENTS IF THEY ARE PREVENTED "BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY" FROM OCCUPYING ASSIGNED QUARTERS AT HIS PERMANENT STATION.

B-50303, AUGUST 23, 1945, 25 COMP. GEN. 220

RENTAL AND QUARTERS ALLOWANCE - DEPENDENTS - EFFECT OF REMOVAL OF BAR TO TRAVEL TO FOREIGN TATIONS; ETC. UNLESS NAVAL PERSONNEL PROMPTLY SUBMIT APPLICATION FOR THEIR DEPENDENTS TO TRAVEL TO THEIR FOREIGN STATIONS, FROM WHICH DEPENDENTS PREVIOUSLY WERE BARRED BUT TO WHICH THEY ARE NOW PERMITTED TO TRAVEL, SUCH DEPENDENTS MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED AS BEING PREVENTED "BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY," WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, AS AMENDED, FROM OCCUPYING QUARTERS ASSIGNED AT THE FOREIGN STATION FOR THEIR OCCUPANCY, SO AS TO ENTITLE THE OFFICER OR ENLISTED MAN TO RENTAL OR QUARTERS ALLOWANCE FOR DEPENDENTS. WHEN NAVAL PERSONNEL WHO NOW ARE PERMITTED TO HAVE THEIR DEPENDENTS AT THEIR FOREIGN STATIONS PROMPTLY APPLY FOR THE DEPENDENTS' TRANSPORTATION TO SUCH STATIONS UPON BEING INFORMED OF THE NECESSITY OF MAKING SUCH APPLICATION, THE DEPENDENTS MAY BE CONSIDERED AS BEING PREVENTED "BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY," WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, AS AMENDED, FROM OCCUPYING ASSIGNED QUARTERS AT THE FOREIGN STATION SO AS TO ENTITLE SUCH PERSONNEL TO RENTAL AND QUARTERS ALLOWANCE FOR DEPENDENTS UNTIL TRANSPORTATION IS AVAILABLE AFTER THE APPLICATION IS ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED, PLUS NORMAL TRAVEL TIME. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 6 OF THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, AS AMENDED, UNDER WHICH AN OFFICER IS ENTITLED TO RENTAL ALLOWANCE AS FOR DEPENDENTS IF THEY ARE PREVENTED "BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY" FROM OCCUPYING ASSIGNED QUARTERS AT HIS PERMANENT STATION, HAVE NO EFFECT TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF RENTAL ALLOWANCE TO A DIVORCED NAVAL OFFICER, WHILE AT A FOREIGN STATION, ON ACCOUNT OF A MINOR CHILD BORN OF DISSOLVED MARRIAGE, WHERE THE OFFICER HAS BEEN DIVESTED OF PARENTAL CONTROL AND CUSTODY OF THE CHILD SO THAT HE WOULD BE PREVENTED FROM TAKING THE CHILD TO HIS STATION IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS THERETO IS ADMINISTRATIVELY PROHIBITED.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL WARREN TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, AUGUST 23, 1945:

THERE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 6, 1945, WITH WHICH YOU TRANSMITTED A LETTER DATED MAY 31, 1945, FROM THE CHIEF, BUREAU OF SUPPLIES AND ACCOUNTS, NAVY DEPARTMENT, REQUESTING DECISION RELATIVE TO THE ENTITLEMENT OF NAVAL PERSONNEL TO PAYMENT OF INCREASED RENTAL AND SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES OR QUARTERS ALLOWANCE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES INDICATED THEREIN.

THE QUESTIONS PRESENTED ARE AS FOLLOWS:

(1) WHETHER OR NOT LIEUTENANT WESLEY L. HOTTENSTEIN (C,) USNR, IS ENTITLED, UNDER THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE ENCLOSURE, TO CONTINUE IN RECEIPT OF INCREASED RENTAL AND SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES FOR DEPENDENT (MINOR CHILD) ON AND AFTER THE DATE PUBLIC QUARTERS ARE AVAILABLE FOR AND ASSIGNED TO HIM AT HIS PERMANENT STATION FOR THE OCCUPANCY OF HIMSELF AND HIS WIFE?

(2) WHETHER OR NOT THE RULE ANNOUNCED IN THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL'S DECISION B-47712 OF APRIL 20, 1945--- TO THE EFFECT THAT SINCE THE CHILD OF THE OFFICER CONCERNED WAS PREVENTED BY ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY FROM OCCUPYING PUBLIC QUARTERS FURNISHED THE OFFICER, HE WAS ENTITLED TO OTHERWISE PROPER CREDIT OF INCREASED RENTAL AND SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES FOR DEPENDENT (ADOPTED CHILD) WHO WAS IN SCHOOL IN THE UNITED STATES--- IS APPLICABLE IN CASES WHERE THE CUSTODY OF THE CHILD IS AWARDED TO ITS MOTHER BY THE DIVORCE DECREE, THEREBY DIVESTING THE OFFICER OF PARENTAL CONTROL AND CUSTODY, IF THE DIVORCED OFFICER REMARRIES AND THE WIFE RESIDES WITH HIM FROM DATE OF MARRIAGE, OR IS SUBSEQUENTLY PERMITTED TO JOIN HIM, AT A SHORE STATION OUTSIDE THE CONTINENTAL LIMITS OF THE UNITED STATES WHERE PUBLIC QUARTERS ARE AVAILABLE AND ASSIGNED TO HIM FOR THE OCCUPANCY OF HIMSELF AND DEPENDENT (WIFE).

(3) SECTION 6 OF THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, AS AMENDED (37 U.S.C; SUPP. IV, 106,) PROVIDES THAT AN OFFICER, ALTHOUGH FURNISHED WITH QUARTERS,"SHALL BE ENTITLED TO RENTAL ALLOWANCE AS AUTHORIZED IN THIS SECTION IF BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY HIS DEPENDENTS ARE PREVENTED FROM OCCUPYING SUCH QUARTERS.' IN ORDER THAT THERE MAY BE AN AUTHORITATIVE RULING IN THIS MATTER, AND IN ORDER THAT A UNIFORM DATE ON WHICH ENTITLEMENT CEASES TO PAYMENT OF INCREASED RENTAL AND SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES MAY BE SET IN ALL CASES WHERE THE RESTRICTIONS CONTAINED IN ALNAV 235-42 OF NOVEMBER 2, 1942, ARE RELAXED UNDER THE CONDITIONS STATED IN THE ENCLOSURE, YOUR FURTHER DECISION IS REQUESTED WHETHER OTHERWISE PROPER CREDITS OF INCREASED RENTAL AND SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES TO DATE PRECEDING DATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PUBLIC QUARTERS TO THE OFFICER FOR THE OCCUPANCY OF HIS DEPENDENTS FOLLOWING THEIR ARRIVAL AT HIS PERMANENT DUTY STATION WILL BE PASSED FOR CREDIT IN THE ACCOUNTS OF DISBURSING OFFICERS?

(4) IN ORDER THAT A UNIFORM RULE MAY BE ESTABLISHED FOR APPLICATION IN DETERMINING EFFECTIVE DATE OF TERMINATION OF CONCURRENT PAYMENT OF STATION QUARTERS ALLOWANCE AND MONEY ALLOWANCE FOR QUARTERS FOR DEPENDENTS, YOUR DECISION IS REQUESTED AS TO WHETHER OTHERWISE PROPER CONCURRENT PAYMENT OF SUCH ALLOWANCES TO AND INCLUDING DATE PRECEDING DATE OF ARRIVAL OF THE DEPENDENT AS THE PERMANENT DUTY STATION WILL BE PASSED FOR CREDIT IN THE ACCOUNTS OF DISBURSING OFFICERS?

WHILE, AS INDICATED ABOVE, QUESTION (3) SPECIFICALLY REFERS TO PAYMENT OF INCREASED SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF DEPENDENTS IN ADDITION TO PAYMENT OF INCREASED RENTAL ALLOWANCE ON THAT ACCOUNT, NEITHER THE MATERIAL FACTS INVOLVED IN THAT QUESTION NOR THE APPLICABLE STATUTES RELATE TO PAYMENT OF SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF DEPENDENTS. THEREFORE, THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION WILL BE LIMITED TO A CONSIDERATION THEREOF ONLY INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO PAYMENT OF INCREASED RENTAL ALLOWANCE. IF THE NAVY DEPARTMENT IS IN DOUBT AS TO AN OFFICER'S RIGHT TO INCREASED SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF DEPENDENTS UNDER PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES, CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN YOUR REQUEST FOR DECISION WITH RESPECT TO THE SPECIFIC CASE INVOLVED.

THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, 56 STAT. 361-363, AS AMENDED BY THE ACT OF MARCH 6, 1943, 57 STAT. 13, INSOFAR AS APPLICABLE TO THE QUESTIONS IN YOUR LETTER, PROVIDES:

SEC. 4. THE TERM "DEPENDENT" AS USED IN THE SUCCEEDING SECTIONS OF THIS ACT SHALL INCLUDE AT ALL TIMES AND IN ALL PLACES A LAWFUL WIFE AND UNMARRIED CHILDREN UNDER TWENTY-ONE YEARS OF AGE. IT SHALL ALSO INCLUDE THE FATHER OR MOTHER OF THE PERSON CONCERNED PROVIDED HE OR SHE IS IN FACT DEPENDENT ON SUCH PERSON FOR HIS OR HER CHIEF SUPPORT: PROVIDED, THAT THE TERM "CHILDREN" SHALL BE HELD TO INCLUDE STEPCHILDREN AND ADOPTED CHILDREN WHEN SUCH STEPCHILDREN OR ADOPTED CHILDREN ARE IN FACT, DEPENDENT UPON THE PERSON CLAIMING DEPENDENCY ALLOWANCE.

SEC. 6. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION, EACH COMMISSIONED OFFICER BELOW THE GRADE OF BRIGADIER GENERAL OR ITS EQUIVALENT, IN ANY OF THE SERVICES MENTIONED IN THE TITLE OF THIS ACT, WHILE EITHER ON ACTIVE DUTY OR ENTITLED TO ACTIVE-DUTY PAY SHALL BE ENTITLED AT ALL TIMES TO A MONEY ALLOWANCE FOR RENTAL OF QUARTERS.

NO RENTAL ALLOWANCE SHALL ACCRUE TO AN OFFICER HAVING NO DEPENDENTS WHILE HE IS ON FIELD DUTY UNLESS HIS COMMANDING OFFICER CERTIFIES THAT HE WAS NECESSARILY REQUIRED TO PROCURE QUARTERS AT HIS OWN EXPENSE, OR WHILE ON SEA DUTY, EXCEPT FOR TEMPORARY PERIODS OF SEA DUTY NOT EXCEEDING THREE MONTHS, NOR SHALL ANY RENTAL ALLOWANCE ACCRUE TO AN OFFICER WITH OR WITHOUT DEPENDENTS WHO IS ASSIGNED QUARTERS AT HIS PERMANENT STATION UNLESS A COMPETENT SUPERIOR AUTHORITY OF THE SERVICE CONCERNED CERTIFIES THAT SUCH QUARTERS ARE NOT OCCUPIED BECAUSE OF BEING INADEQUATE FOR THE OCCUPANCY OF THE OFFICER AND HIS DEPENDENTS, IF ANY, AND SUCH CERTIFICATIONS SHALL BE CONCLUSIVE: PROVIDED, THAT AN OFFICER ALTHOUGH FURNISHED WITH QUARTERS SHALL BE ENTITLED TO RENTAL ALLOWANCE AS AUTHORIZED IN THIS SECTION IF BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY HIS DEPENDENTS ARE PREVENTED FROM OCCUPYING SUCH QUARTERS.

SEC. 10. * * * .

EACH ENLISTED MAN OF THE FIRST, SECOND, OR THIRD GRADE, IN THE ACTIVE MILITARY, NAVAL, OR COAST GUARD SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES HAVING A DEPENDENT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 4 OF THIS, SHALL, UNDER SUCH REGULATIONS AS THE PRESIDENT MAY PRESCRIBE, BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE, FOR ANY PERIOD DURING WHICH PUBLIC QUARTERS ARE NOT PROVIDED AND AVAILABLE FOR HIS DEPENDENT, THE MONTHLY ALLOWANCE FOR QUARTERS AUTHORIZED BY LAW TO BE GRANTED TO EACH ENLISTED MAN NOT FURNISHED QUARTERS IN KIND: PROVIDED,THAT SUCH ENLISTED MAN SHALL CONTINUE TO BE ENTITLED TO THIS ALLOWANCE ALTHOUGH RECEIVING THE ALLOWANCE PROVIDED IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF THIS SECTION IF BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY HIS DEPENDENT IS PREVENTED FROM DWELLING WITH HIM.

BY ALNAV 235, DATED NOVEMBER 2, 1942, THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY SUSPENDED, UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE, THE TRANSPORTATION OF ALL DEPENDENTS OF PERSONNEL OF THE NAVAL ESTABLISHMENT TO POINTS OUTSIDE THE CONTINENTAL LIMITS OF THE UNITED STATES, INCLUDING THE CANAL ZONE AND ALASKA, AND IT APPEARS FROM A LETTER DATED APRIL 23, 1945, FROM THE OFFICE OF CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS, THAT THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY NOW HAS AUTHORIZED TRAVEL TO THE GULF, CARIBBEAN, AND PANAMA SEA FRONTIERS, MEXICO, AND BRAZIL BY DEPENDENTS OF PERSONNEL OF THE NAVAL ESTABLISHMENT ON PERMANENT SHORE DUTY IN THOSE AREAS, WHOSE RANK OR RATING ENTITLES THEM TO TRANSPORTATION OF THEIR DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE. THE FURNISHING OF SUCH TRANSPORTATION IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

(A) THAT THE TRAVEL IS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING RESIDENCE WITH (NOT VISITING) THE PERSONNEL CONCERNED;

(B) THAT THE PERSONNEL CONCERNED (NOT THEIR DEPENDENTS) WILL SUBMIT APPROPRIATE APPLICATIONS TO THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL VIA THE CHAIN OF COMMAND, INCLUDING THE NAVAL COMMANDER OF THE AREA CONCERNED (I.E., THE COMMANDER OF THE APPROPRIATE SEA FRONTIER OR THE COMMANDER, SOUTH ATLANTIC FORCE, IN THE CASE OF BRAZIL);

(C) THAT THE NAVAL AREA COMMANDER IN EACH AREA (1) WILL COORDINATE THE LOCAL POLICY TO GOVERN THE HANDLING OF SUCH APPLICATIONS WITH THE APPROPRIATE LOCAL ARMY COMMANDER ON THE BASIS OF AVAILABILITY AND SUITABILITY OF HOUSING, THE AVAILABILITY OF MEDICAL FACILITIES, AND OTHER PERTINENT LOCAL CONDITIONS, AND (2) WILL DETERMINE THE ORDER IN WHICH APPLICATIONS WILL BE APPROVED.

(D) THAT NO GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION WILL BE FURNISHED EXCEPT AS MAY BECOME AVAILABLE AS SURPLUS;

(E) THAT REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS WILL BE EFFECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXISTING LAW;

(F) THAT NO HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PRIVATE AUTOMOBILES WILL BE TRANSPORTED VIA GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION OR AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE; AND

(G) THAT NO INCREASE IN NAVY PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO THE AREAS IN QUESTION WILL RESULT.

THE RIGHT OF THE NAVY DEPARTMENT TO REFUSE TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS OF OFFICERS ASSIGNED TO PARTICULAR STATIONS ON THE BASIS THAT CONDITIONS OF A MILITARY CHARACTER JUSTIFY SUCH REFUSAL, HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED ( CULP V. UNITED STATES, 76 C.1CLS. 507); AND IN A DECISION DATED MAY 2, 1941, 20 COMP. GEN. 720, TO YOU, CONCERNING THE RIGHT OF OFFICERS AND ENLISTED MEN OF THE FIRST THREE GRADES TO RECEIVE RENTAL ALLOWANCE AND MONEY ALLOWANCE FOR QUARTERS ON ACCOUNT OF DEPENDENTS WHO WERE PROHIBITED BY THE NAVY DEPARTMENT FROM ACCOMPANYING THEM TO THEIR STATIONS, IT WAS HELD THAT SAID OFFICERS AND ENLISTED MEN WERE ENTITLED TO SUCH ALLOWANCES EVEN THOUGH PUBLIC QUARTERS WERE AVAILABLE FOR THEIR DEPENDENTS, AND THAT SUCH ALLOWANCES WERE PAYABLE FROM THE DATE OF ARRIVAL OF THE OFFICERS AND ENLISTED MEN AT THEIR ASSIGNED STATIONS, PROVIDED, OF COURSE, PUBLIC QUARTERS WERE NOT IN FACT OCCUPIED BY THEIR DEPENDENTS. ALSO, SEE 21 COMP. GEN. 752.

THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED IN THE SAID LETTER OF APRIL 23, 1945, AMOUNT TO A RELAXATION OF THE RESTRICTIONS AGAINST THE TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS TO AN OFFICER'S OR ENLISTED MAN'S FOREIGN STATION; AND, IF THE CONDITIONS SET OUT THEREIN ARE MET, IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS NO BAR TO TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS IN A PARTICULAR CASE. ONE OF THE CONDITIONS INDICATED IN SAID LETTER IS THAT THE OFFICER OR ENLISTED MAN CONCERNED SUBMIT APPROPRIATE APPLICATION FOR HIS DEPENDENTS TO TRAVEL TO HIS STATION, AND IT APPEARS TO BE THE ADMINISTRATIVE VIEW THAT UNLESS THE OFFICER OR ENLISTED MAN ELECTS TO MAKE SUCH AN APPLICATION HIS DEPENDENTS WILL CONTINUE TO BE PREVENTED "BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY" FROM OCCUPYING QUARTERS WHICH MAY BE ASSIGNED TO HIM AT HIS STATION. HOWEVER, THE APPLICABLE STATUTORY PROVISIONS RELATING TO ORDERS PREVENTING TRAVEL TO FOREIGN STATIONS DO NOT CONTEMPLATE THAT THE OFFICER OR ENLISTED MAN WILL BE PLACED IN A POSITION SO THAT HE MAY CONTINUE THE PROHIBITION AGAINST TRAVEL OF HIS DEPENDENTS TO HIS STATION MERELY BY FAILING TO MAKE APPLICATION FOR SUCH TRAVEL. ACCORDINGLY, UNLESS THE NAVAL PERSONNEL CONCERNED PROMPTLY SUBMIT APPLICATION FOR THEIR DEPENDENTS TO TRAVEL TO THEIR FOREIGN STATIONS, SUCH DEPENDENTS MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED AS BEING PREVENTED "BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY" FROM OCCUPYING QUARTERS ASSIGNED TO SUCH PERSONNEL FOR OCCUPANCY BY THEIR DEPENDENTS. IF, AFTER THE PERSONNEL INVOLVED ARE INFORMED OF THE NECESSITY OF MAKING SUCH APPLICATION, THEY PROMPTLY APPLY, THE DEPENDENTS OF A PARTICULAR OFFICER OR ENLISTED MAN MAY BE CONSIDERED AS BEING PREVENTED BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY FROM OCCUPYING QUARTERS ASSIGNED AT THE FOREIGN STATION UNTIL TRANSPORTATION IS AVAILABLE FOR TRAVEL TO THAT STATION AFTER THE APPLICATION IS APPROVED BY THE NAVY DEPARTMENT, PLUS THE NORMAL TRAVEL TIME TO SAID STATION. QUESTIONS (3) AND (4) ARE ANSWERED ACCORDINGLY.

WITH RESPECT TO YOUR QUESTION (2,) THE RULE PROMULGATED IN THE DECISION OF APRIL 20, 1945, B-47712, REFERRED TO IN YOUR LETTER, WAS BASED ON THE NORMAL SITUATION OF A HUSBAND AND FATHER AS THE HEAD OF A FAMILY CHARGED WITH THE LEGAL DUTY OF SUPPORTING HIS WIFE AND CHILD AND WAS NOT DESIGNED TO AUTHORIZE INCREASED RENTAL ALLOWANCE, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES THERE CONSIDERED, ON ACCOUNT OF A CHILD NOT IN THE OFFICER'S CUSTODY. IN THE CASE OF A DIVORCED OFFICER THE PROHIBITION AGAINST TRAVEL BY DEPENDENTS TO HIS STATION REASONABLY MAY BE VIEWED AS PREVENTING ONLY TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS WHOM THE OFFICER OTHERWISE IS CAPABLE TO TAKING TO HIS STATION AND SUCH PROHIBITION MAY NOT BE USED TO INCREASE HIS RIGHT TO RENTAL ALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF A CHILD OF HIS DISSOLVED MARRIAGE UNLESS IT APPEARS, AS A MATTER OF FACT, THAT THE OFFICER WOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE HIS CHILD TO HIS STATION IF NO PROHIBITION WITH RESPECT TO TRAVEL THERETO EXISTED. IN OTHER WORDS, IF, PRIOR TO THE SAID PROHIBITION, AN OFFICER WAS ASSIGNED QUARTERS FOR HIMSELF AND HIS DEPENDENTS AND THEY WERE OCCUPIED BY HIM AND HIS SECOND WIFE, HE WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO RENTAL ALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF A MINOR CHILD OF HIS FIRST MARRIAGE WHO WAS NOT RESIDING IN SUCH PUBLIC QUARTERS AND THAT WOULD BE THE CASE EVEN THOUGH THE CHILD COULD NOT RESIDE WITH THE OFFICER BECAUSE OF A COURT DECREE AWARDING CUSTODY OF THE CHILD TO ITS MOTHER. THE FACT THAT SUBSEQUENTLY TRAVEL BY THAT CHILD TO THE OFFICER'S STATION COULD NOT BE PERFORMED BECAUSE OF AN ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY DOES NOT INCREASE THE OFFICER'S RIGHT TO RENTAL ALLOWANCE UNLESS IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT THE OFFICER OBTAINED SUCH CONTROL OF HIS CHILD AS WOULD PERMIT HIM TO TAKE THE CHILD TO HIS STATION BUT FOR THE ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY. WHERE AN OFFICER IS DIVESTED OF PARENTAL CONTROL AND CUSTODY OF HIS CHILD IT APPEARS THAT HE WOULD BE PREVENTED FROM TAKING THE CHILD TO HIS FOREIGN STATION, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER TRAVEL TO THAT STATION WAS PROHIBITED BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY. HENCE, IT MUST BE CONCLUDED THAT SUCH A DEPENDENT IS NOT PREVENTED,"BY REASON OF ORDERS OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY," FROM OCCUPYING QUARTERS ASSIGNED TO AN OFFICER OR ENLISTED MAN AT HIS STATION FOR THE OCCUPANCY OF HIMSELF AND HIS FAMILY. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES INDICATED IN QUESTION (2), THE OFFICER WOULD BE ENTITLED TO INCREASED SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF HIS WIFE AND NO RENTAL ALLOWANCE. QUESTION (2) IS ANSWERED ACCORDINGLY.

WITH RESPECT TO QUESTION (1), IT APPEARS FROM THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED WITH YOUR LETTER THAT LIEUTENANT HOTTENSTEIN WAS GRANTED AN ABSOLUTE DIVORCE IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DAUPHIN COUNTY, STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, ON DECEMBER 4, 1942, IN THE CASE OF WESLEY L. HOTTENSTEIN ( LIBELANT) V. FLORENCE L. HOTTENSTEIN ( RESPONDENT); THAT THE DECREE OF DIVORCE MADE NO PROVISION FOR THE CARE, CUSTODY, MAINTENANCE, AND SUPPORT OF THEIR MINOR CHILD; THAT THE CHILD RESIDES WITH ITS MOTHER AND THAT THE OFFICER IS MAINTAINING A DEPENDENT'S ALLOTMENT OF $50 PER MONTH IN FAVOR OF HIS FORMER WIFE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CHILD; THAT LIEUTENANT HOTTENSTEIN REMARRIED IN THE CANAL ZONE ON FEBRUARY 16 (15), 1945, AND RESIDES WITH HIS SECOND WIFE AT COCA SOLITO HOUSING PROJECT UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE NAVY DEPARTMENT, AND PAYS RENTAL FOR SUCH QUARTERS; THAT THE OFFICER HAS BEEN CREDITED WITH INCREASED ALLOWANCES AS FOR AN OFFICER WITH DEPENDENTS (UNMARRIED MINOR CHILD) TO THE DATE OF HIS REMARRIAGE; AND THAT IT IS CONTEMPLATED THAT HE WILL BE ASSIGNED PUBLIC QUARTERS FOR WHICH NO RENTAL IS CHARGED FOR OCCUPANCY BY HIMSELF AND DEPENDENTS.

THE OFFICER HAS NOT SUBMITTED THE REQUIRED CERTIFICATE AS TO THE DEPENDENCY STATUS OF HIS CHILD. SEE 24 COMP. GEN. 233; 9 ID. 299.

IN VIEW OF THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN ANSWER TO QUESTION (2), AND IN THE ABSENCE OF A SHOWING THAT LIEUTENANT HOTTENSTEIN HAS SUCH CONTROL OF HIS MINOR CHILD AS WOULD PERMIT HIM TO TAKE THE CHILD TO HIS STATION, IT MUST BE CONCLUDED THAT HE MAY NOT BE CREDITED WITH INCREASED RENTAL ALLOWANCE AS FOR AN OFFICER WITH DEPENDENTS (UNMARRIED MINOR CHILD) ON AND AFTER THE DATE HE IS ASSIGNED QUARTERS FOR HIMSELF AND DEPENDENTS. THE FACTS SUBMITTED INDICATE NO REASON FOR WITHHOLDING FROM THE OFFICER OTHERWISE PROPER CREDITS OF INCREASED SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF HIS WIFE.

QUESTION (1) IS ANSWERED ACCORDINGLY.