B-52940, NOVEMBER 2, 1945, 25 COMP. GEN. 372

B-52940: Nov 2, 1945

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

SINCE MILEAGE FOR THE USE OF A PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE IS AUTHORIZED. EACH MEMBER OF THE EMPLOYEE'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY AS DEFINED IN SAID EXECUTIVE REGULATIONS IS ENTITLED TO INDIVIDUAL LOWEST FIRST-CLASS ACCOMMODATIONS AS AUTHORIZED IN PARAGRAPH 13 OF THE TRAVEL REGULATIONS. ARE PAYABLE FROM THE OLD STATION TO SUCH INTERMEDIATE POINT. WHERE THE POINT AT WHICH A TRANSFERRED EMPLOYEE ESTABLISHED HIS HOME WAS LOCATED BEYOND HIS NEW OFFICIAL STATION. SUCH POINT MAY NOT BE REGARDED AS A POINT TO WHICH THE EMPLOYEE IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORT THE MEMBERS OF HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE. 1945: I HAVE YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 1. AS FOLLOWS: THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS HAVE ARISEN CONCERNING PAYMENT OF EXPENSES OF TRANSPORTATION OF AN EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY INCIDENT TO CHANGE IN OFFICIAL STATION AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES ACT.

B-52940, NOVEMBER 2, 1945, 25 COMP. GEN. 372

TRANSPORTATION - DEPENDENTS - TRANSFERRED CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES WHERE ORDERS FOR CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION AUTHORIZE AN EMPLOYEE TO USE HIS PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE ON A MILEAGE BASIS AT A STATED RATE PER MILE, PROVIDED THAT IT SHALL NOT EXCEED THE COST BY COMMON CARRIER OF ALL PERSONS OFFICIALLY TRAVELING IN THAT VEHICLE, THE DETERMINATION OF ECONOMY AND ADVANTAGE MAY BE MADE BY COMPARING THE TOTAL MILEAGE CLAIMED WITH THE COST BY COMMON CARRIER OF ALL PERSONS SO OFFICIALLY TRAVELING, INCLUDING HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY ACCOMPANYING HIM UPON PROPER AUTHORIZATION FOR THEIR TRANSPORTATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT, 1946. SINCE MILEAGE FOR THE USE OF A PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE IS AUTHORIZED, PURSUANT TO THE ACT OF FEBRUARY 14, 1931, AS AMENDED, ONLY TO A "CIVILIAN OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE ENGAGED IN NECESSARY TRAVEL ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS," THE EXPENSES OF TRANSPORTATION OF THE MEMBERS OF AN EMPLOYEE'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE AUTHORIZED UNDER SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT, 1946, UPON THE EMPLOYEE'S CHANGE OF OFFICIAL STATION, MAY NOT BE PAID ON A MILEAGE BASIS FOR TRAVEL BY PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE BY THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE EMPLOYEE HIMSELF. UNDER THE EXECUTIVE REGULATIONS ISSUED PURSUANT TO SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT, 1946, MAKING THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE IMMEDIATE FAMILY OF A TRANSFERRED EMPLOYEE SUBJECT TO THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, EACH MEMBER OF THE EMPLOYEE'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY AS DEFINED IN SAID EXECUTIVE REGULATIONS IS ENTITLED TO INDIVIDUAL LOWEST FIRST-CLASS ACCOMMODATIONS AS AUTHORIZED IN PARAGRAPH 13 OF THE TRAVEL REGULATIONS. WHERE AN EMPLOYEE, UPON PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, ESTABLISHES HIS HOME AT AN INTERMEDIATE POINT BETWEEN HIS OLD AND NEW PERMANENT STATION, THE EXPENSES OF TRANSPORTATION OF THE MEMBERS OF THE EMPLOYEE'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY, AS AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT, 1946, AND THE EXECUTIVE REGULATIONS THEREUNDER, ARE PAYABLE FROM THE OLD STATION TO SUCH INTERMEDIATE POINT. WHERE THE POINT AT WHICH A TRANSFERRED EMPLOYEE ESTABLISHED HIS HOME WAS LOCATED BEYOND HIS NEW OFFICIAL STATION--- NOT WITHIN COMMUTING DISTANCE THEREOF--- VARYING FROM A GEOGRAPHIC LINE BETWEEN HIS OLD AND NEW STATIONS, SUCH POINT MAY NOT BE REGARDED AS A POINT TO WHICH THE EMPLOYEE IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORT THE MEMBERS OF HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE, NOT TO EXCEED THE COST FROM THE OLD TO THE NEW STATION, UNDER SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT, 1946, AND THE EXECUTIVE REGULATIONS THEREUNDER. REIMBURSEMENT TO AN EMPLOYEE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES OF HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY INCIDENT TO A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION BEING LIMITED UNDER SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1946, TO THOSE CASES "WHEN AUTHORIZED BY THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OR ESTABLISHMENT IN THE ORDER DIRECTING THE TRANSFER," AN EMPLOYEE'S TRANSFER ORDERS MAY NOT BE AMENDED BY THE HEAD OF THE ESTABLISHMENT TO INCLUDE THE TRANSPORTATION OF MEMBERS OF HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY AT ANY TIME AFTER THE EMPLOYEE HIMSELF HAS DEPARTED FROM HIS OLD STATION. IF AN EMPLOYEE'S TRANSFER ORDER AUTHORIZES, PURSUANT TO SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT, 1946, THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE IMMEDIATE FAMILY OF THE EMPLOYEE BY THAT DESCRIPTION, IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR AUDIT PURPOSES PROVIDED THE EMPLOYEE'S VOUCHER CLAIMING REIMBURSEMENT STATES THE NAMES, AGES, AND RELATIONSHIP OF THE MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY SO TRANSPORTED; HOWEVER, THE INCLUSION OF SUCH INFORMATION IN THE TRANSFER ORDER ITSELF WOULD NOT BE OBJECTIONABLE.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL WARREN TO THE PRICE ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE OF PRICE ADMINISTRATION, NOVEMBER 2, 1945:

I HAVE YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 1, 1945, AS FOLLOWS:

THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS HAVE ARISEN CONCERNING PAYMENT OF EXPENSES OF TRANSPORTATION OF AN EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY INCIDENT TO CHANGE IN OFFICIAL STATION AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES ACT, 1946.

1. IT WAS RULED IN 17 COMP. GEN. 307 THAT IF THE TRAVEL ORDER AUTHORIZES A FIXED MILEAGE RATE SUBJECT TO A DETERMINATION OF ECONOMY AND ADVANTAGE AFTER THE TRAVEL WAS COMPLETED AND THE TRAVELER IS ACCOMPANIED BY OTHER GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES ALSO TRAVELING ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS THE ESTIMATED COST BY COMMON CARRIER FOR THE WHOLE NUMBER TRAVELING MAY BE USED. AS THE DECISION REFERS ONLY TO GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES TRAVELING ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS CAN THE IMMEDIATE MEMBERS OF AN EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY BE CONSIDERED AS GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE DECISION IF TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES ARE PROPERLY AUTHORIZED? IF YOUR ANSWER IS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, WOULD THERE BE ANY OBJECTION TO MAKING REIMBURSEMENT ON A MILEAGE BASIS FOR USE OF PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLE NOT TO EXCEED THE COST BY COMMON CARRIER FOR THE ENTIRE GROUP IF PROPERLY AUTHORIZED?

2. PARAGRAPH 12 (A) OF STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS ALLOWS MILEAGE ONLY TO A CIVILIAN OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE. MAY A COMMUTED MILEAGE RATE BE ALLOWED IF THE EMPLOYEE TRAVELS BY COMMON CARRIER IN ADVANCE AND THE IMMEDIATE MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY FOLLOW BY PRIVATE VEHICLE? IF YOUR ANSWER IS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, WOULD THERE BE ANY OBJECTION TO MAKING REIMBURSEMENT ON A MILEAGE BASIS FOR USE OF PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLE NOT TO EXCEED THE COST BY COMMON CARRIER FOR THE ENTIRE GROUP TRAVELING BY PRIVATE VEHICLE IF PROPERLY AUTHORIZED?

3. ARE ALL MEMBERS OF THE EMPLOYEE'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY ENTITLED TO INDIVIDUAL LOWEST RATES FIRST CLASS ACCOMMODATIONS AS AUTHORIZED IN PARAGRAPH 13 OF STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS?

4. AN EMPLOYEE WHOSE OFFICIAL STATION IS CHICAGO, ILL., IS TRANSFERRED TO WASHINGTON, D.C., WHILE MAINTAINING RESIDENCE FOR HIS FAMILY IN MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN. MAY TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES BE AUTHORIZED AND PAID FOR THE IMMEDIATE MEMBERS OF THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY FROM MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN TO WASHINGTON, D.C.? IF YOUR ANSWER IS IN THE NEGATIVE, MAY TRAVELING EXPENSES BE PAID FROM MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN TO WASHINGTON, D.C., NOT TO EXCEED THE COST FROM CHICAGO, ILLINOIS?

5. AN EMPLOYEE WHOSE OFFICIAL STATION IS WASHINGTON, D.C. IS TRANSFERRED TO NEW YORK, NEW YORK, AND DESIRES TO ESTABLISH RESIDENCE FOR HIS FAMILY IN PHILADELPHIA, PA. MAY TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES BE PAID FOR THE IMMEDIATE MEMBERS OF THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY FROM WASHINGTON, D.C., TO PHILADELPHIA, PA?

6. AN EMPLOYEE WHOSE OFFICIAL STATION IS WASHINGTON, D.C., IS TRANSFERRED TO NEW YORK, NEW YORK AND DESIRES TO ESTABLISH RESIDENCE FOR HIS FAMILY IN BOSTON, MASS. MAY TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES BE PAID FOR THE IMMEDIATE MEMBERS OF THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY FROM WASHINGTON, D.C., TO BOSTON, MASS. NOT TO EXCEED THE COST TO NEW YORK, NEW YORK?

7. MAY THE ADMINISTRATOR'S AUTHORIZATION FOR TRANSFER AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE MEMBERS OF THE EMPLOYEE'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY:

A. IF THE EMPLOYEE HAS DEPARTED FOR THE NEW STATION AND THE FAMILY HAS NOT?

B. IF ALL ARE ENROUTE BUT HAVE NOT ARRIVED AT THE NEW STATION?

8. IS IT MANDATORY THE ADMINISTRATOR IN HIS AUTHORIZATION FOR TRAVEL INCLUDE THE NAMES AND AGES OF THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY OR IS IT SUFFICIENT TO AUTHORIZE THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS WITHOUT SPECIFICATION AND INCLUDE THE NAMES AND AGES ON THE EMPLOYEE'S REIMBURSEMENT VOUCHER?

YOUR OPINION AT AN EARLY DATE WILL BE APPRECIATED.

THE SEVERAL QUESTIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THE ORDER PRESENTED.

QUESTION 1

IN THE DECISION, 17 COMP. GEN. 307, REFERRED TO BY YOU, IT WAS STATED THAT A TRAVEL ORDER OR GENERAL REGULATION AUTHORIZING THE USE OF PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILES, AT A STATED RATE PER MILE, WHICH ORDER OR REGULATION LIMITS REIMBURSEMENT TO NOT EXCEEDING COST BY COMMON CARRIER, MUST BE CONSTRUED TO MEAN THE COST BY COMMON CARRIER OF ONE FARE, ONLY. IT WAS FURTHER HELD, IN EFFECT, THAT SUCH A REGULATION PROPERLY MIGHT BE AMENDED BY PROVIDING FOR MILEAGE WITHIN THE MAXIMUM RATE PERMITTED BY THE ACT OF FEBRUARY 14, 1931, AS AMENDED, 47 STAT. 1516, NOT TO EXCEED THE COST BY COMMON CARRIER OF ALL PERSONS OFFICIALLY TRAVELING WITH THE OWNER OF THE VEHICLE. CF. 22 COMP. GEN. 572, AND B-52359, OCTOBER 4, 1945. AS SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT, APPROVED MAY 3, 1945. PUBLIC LAW 49, 59 STAT. 131, EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZES ,EXPENSES OF TRANSPORTATION OF THEIR IMMEDIATE FAMILIES," IT APPEARS REASONABLE TO CONCLUDE THAT THE IMMEDIATE FAMILIES MAY BE CONSIDERED AS "PERSONS OFFICIALLY TRAVELING" WHEN THEIR TRAVEL HAS BEEN DULY AUTHORIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID SECTION 201 (A). ACCORDINGLY, WHEN THE IMMEDIATE FAMILY ACCOMPANIES THE EMPLOYEE WHO HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED TO USE HIS PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE ON A MILEAGE BASIS UNDER ORDERS WHICH AUTHORIZE A STATED MILEAGE RATE PROVIDED THAT IT SHALL NOT EXCEED THE COST BY COMMON CARRIER OF ALL PERSONS OFFICIALLY TRAVELING IN THAT VEHICLE, OR LANGUAGE TO THE SAME EFFECT, IT WOULD BE PROPER TO COMPARE THE TOTAL MILEAGE CLAIMED WITH THE COST BY COMMON CARRIER OF ALL PERSONS SO OFFICIALLY TRAVELING, INCLUDING THE IMMEDIATE FAMILY OF THE EMPLOYEE. FURTHER, IF THE TRAVEL ORDERS TO THE EMPLOYEE, AUTHORIZING A STATED MILEAGE RATE FOR THE USE OF HIS PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE, CONTAIN A GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION THAT SUCH MODE OF TRAVEL HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE MORE ECONOMICAL AND ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT, NO REDUCTION IN THE AUTHORIZED MILEAGE WOULD BE REQUIRED BY REASON OF THE FACT THAT THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY ACCOMPANIED HIM IN THE SAME VEHICLE. 21 COMP. GEN. 713. OF COURSE, IF SUCH DETERMINATION OF ECONOMY AND ADVANTAGE WERE NOT MADE IN ADVANCE OF TRAVEL, THE FACT THAT THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY ACCOMPANIED HIM--- UPON PROPER AUTHORIZATION OF THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY--- WOULD BE A FACTOR PROPERLY FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE MAKING OF SUCH DETERMINATION OF ECONOMY AND ADVANTAGE.

QUESTION 2

MILEAGE FOR THE USE OF PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE IS AUTHORIZED, PURSUANT TO THE ACT OF FEBRUARY 14, 1931, 46 STAT. 1103, AS AMENDED, ONLY TO A "CIVILIAN OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE ENGAGED IN NECESSARY TRAVEL ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS.' UNDER THAT STATUTE, THERE IS NO AUTHORITY TO PAY MILEAGE FOR THE USE OF A PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF AN EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY WHEN NOT ACCOMPANIED BY THE EMPLOYEE HIMSELF. B-52368, OCTOBER 4, 1945, 25 COMP. GEN. 325; 22 COMP. GEN. 548.

QUESTION 3

ALL MEMBERS OF THE EMPLOYEE'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY, AS DEFINED IN EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 9587, OF JULY 6, 1945, ARE ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. ACCORDINGLY, EACH MEMBER OF THE EMPLOYEE'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY WILL BE ENTITLED TO INDIVIDUAL LOWEST FIRST-CLASS ACCOMMODATIONS AS AUTHORIZED IN PARAGRAPH 13 OF SAID REGULATIONS.

QUESTION 4

WITH RESPECT TO THE POINTS BETWEEN WHICH TRANSPORTATION OF MEMBERS OF THE EMPLOYEE'S HOUSEHOLD MAY BE AUTHORIZED, IT WILL BE OBSERVED THAT EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 9587 DOES NOT PLACE ANY LIMITATION OR RESTRICTION THEREON EXCEPT THAT THE "COST TO THE GOVERNMENT SHALL NOT EXCEED THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION BY THE MOST ECONOMICAL ROUTE BETWEEN THE LAST OFFICIAL STATION AND THE NEW OFFICIAL STATION.' UNDER SIMILAR STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND REGULATION IT HAS BEEN CUSTOMARY HERETOFORE TO PERMIT REIMBURSEMENT OF THE ACTUAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY FROM WHATEVER POINT THEY MAY BE WHEN THE TRANSFER ORDERS ARE RECEIVED TO THE NEW OFFICIAL STATION OF THE EMPLOYEE, NOT TO EXCEED, HOWEVER, THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION BY THE LOWEST ECONOMICAL USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW STATIONS. 2 COMP. GEN. 464; 4 ID. 40; 19 ID. 102; AND B- 52368, OCTOBER 4, 1945, 25 COMP. GEN. 325. NO REASON IS PERCEIVED FOR APPLYING ANY DIFFERENT RULE TO THE SITUATION HERE PRESENTED.

QUESTION 5

AS INDICATED ABOVE, EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 9587 OF JULY 6, 1945, IS SILENT AS TO THE POINTS BETWEEN WHICH THE IMMEDIATE FAMILY MAY BE TRANSPORTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE EXCEPT FOR THE LIMITATION THAT THE "COST TO THE GOVERNMENT SHALL NOT EXCEED THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION BY THE MOST ECONOMICAL ROUTE BETWEEN THE LAST OFFICIAL STATION AND THE NEW STATION.' HOWEVER, THE MOTIVES UNDERLYING THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE WOULD APPEAR TO BE VERY SIMILAR TO THOSE INCIDENT TO THE TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS, THAT IS, THE DESIRE OR NECESSITY OF ESTABLISHING A HOME FOR THE FAMILY ACCESSIBLE, IF POSSIBLE, TO THE EMPLOYEE'S PLACE OF DUTY. IN 22 COMP. GEN. 478, AT PAGE 483, IT WAS HELD THAT---

* * * (3) WHILE SECTION 11 OF THE REGULATIONS ( EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 9122), AUTHORIZES TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS FROM A POINT OTHER THAN THE LAST OFFICIAL STATION OF AN EMPLOYEE, PROVIDED THE COST DOES NOT EXCEED THE AMOUNT IT WOULD HAVE COST TO TRANSPORT THE HOUSEHOLD GOODS FROM THE LAST OFFICIAL STATION TO THE NEW, THERE IS NO AUTHORITY UNDER THE REGULATIONS OR THE LAW OR THE PRESIDENT'S ALLOCATION LETTERS, AUTHORIZING REIMBURSEMENT TO ANY POINT OTHER THAN THE NEW STATION OF THE EMPLOYEE.

FOLLOWING THAT DECISION IT WAS HELD IN 23 COMP. GEN. 886, PAGE 887, AS FOLLOWS:

WHILE IT IS TRUE, AS INDICATED IN THE DECISION, SUPRA (22 COMP. GEN. 478) THAT THE LAWS AND REGULATIONS THEREUNDER DO NOT SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZE THE SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS TO ANY POINT OTHER THAN THE NEW STATION OF THE EMPLOYEE, THERE APPEARS NO SOUND REASON WHY AN EMPLOYEE WHO, INCIDENT TO AN AUTHORIZED CHANGE OF STATION, ESTABLISHES HIS HOME AT AN INTERMEDIATE POINT BETWEEN THE OLD AND THE NEW STATIONS, MAY NOT HAVE HIS HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS SHIPPED TO SUCH HOME AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE--- THE COST TO THE GOVERNMENT BEING LESS THAN THE COST WOULD HAVE BEEN HAD THE SHIPMENT BEEN TO HIS NEW STATION. WHILE, ORDINARILY, THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE HOME AT SOME INTERMEDIATE POINT CONTEMPLATES ITS LOCATION AT A POINT MORE OR LESS ACCESSIBLE TO THE EMPLOYEE, IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AND HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS TO HAWAII AT THE PRESENT TIME--- IF NOT ABSOLUTELY PROHIBITED FOR MILITARY REASONS--- PRESENTS GREAT DIFFICULTIES; AND ACCORDINGLY, THIS OFFICE WILL NOT OBJECT TO THE OTHERWISE PROPER PAYMENT FROM APPROPRIATED FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS SPECIFICALLY, OR THE "TRANSPORTATION OF THINGS" GENERALLY (SEE SECTION 201 (B) OF PUBLIC LAW 90, APPROVED JUNE 26, 1943, 57 STAT. 195), FOR THE SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS OF THE EMPLOYEE HERE INVOLVED BETWEEN HIS FORMER STATION AT FORT WASHINGTON, WISCONSIN, AND MARYSVILLE, WASHINGTON, AS INCIDENTAL TO HIS TRANSFER TO HAWAII, PROVIDED, OF COURSE, THE REGULATIONS ISSUED BY THE PRESIDENT IN EXECUTIVE ORDERS 8588, 9122, AND 9223, OTHERWISE ARE COMPLIED WITH.

THE REASONING APPLIED IN THE DECISION JUST QUOTED WOULD APPEAR TO APPLY WITH EQUAL FORCE TO THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE IMMEDIATE FAMILIES; HENCE, QUESTION 5 IS ANSWERED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

QUESTION 6

WITH RESPECT TO THE TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS TO A POINT BEYOND THE NEW STATION IT WAS HELD IN 24 COMP. GEN. 34, AS FOLLOWS:

IN THE DECISION OF MAY 24, 1944, B-41674, 23 COMP. GEN. 886, TO WHICH YOU REFER, AND IN THE ABOVE-QUOTED DECISION OF JUNE 22, 1944, THIS OFFICE HAS INTERPRETED THE CONTROLLING REGULATION AS AUTHORIZING SHIPMENT TO AN INTERMEDIATE POINT BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW OFFICIAL STATION WHERE THE FACTS SHOW THAT THE EMPLOYEE ACTUALLY ESTABLISHED HIS HOME AT SUCH INTERMEDIATE POINT SOLELY BECAUSE OF THE PRESENT WAR CONDITIONS. BUT WHILE THIS OFFICE IS NOT UNMINDFUL OF THE CONDITIONS PRESENTED IN THE INSTANT CASE AND HAS GIVEN CAREFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ARGUMENT ADVANCED IN THE PENULTIMATE PARAGRAPH OF YOUR LETTER, I CAN FIND NO JUSTIFICATION FOR CONSTRUING THE REGULATIONS OF THE PRESIDENT AS BROAD ENOUGH TO COVER A SITUATION SUCH AS HERE PRESENTED. ANY FURTHER RELAXATION OF THE REGULATION TO AUTHORIZE SHIPMENT TO A POINT OTHER THAN THE NEW OFFICIAL STATION OF AN EMPLOYEE SHOULD BE BY AN AMENDMENT TO THE REGULATIONS OF THE PRESIDENT--- A MATTER NOT FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS OFFICE.

AS THE HOUSEHOLD GOODS IN THE INSTANT CASE WERE SHIPPED FROM WASHINGTON, D.C., TO HOUSTON, TEXAS, RATHER THAN TO DALLAS, TEXAS, THE NEW OFFICIAL STATION OF THE EMPLOYEE, AND AS HOUSTON--- LOCATED OVER 300 MILES SOUTH OF DALLAS, GREATLY VARYING FROM A GEOGRAPHICAL LINE BETWEEN WASHINGTON AND DALLAS--- MAY NOT, BY ANY REASONABLE APPLICATION OF THE TERM, BE REGARDED AS AN INTERMEDIATE POINT BETWEEN WASHINGTON AND DALLAS WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE RECENT DECISIONS, SUPRA, THE SUBMITTED VOUCHER MAY NOT BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT. I THINK THE SAME REASONING PROPERLY IS FOR APPLYING TO THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY. ACCORDINGLY, QUESTION 6 IS ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE.

QUESTION 7

SECTION 201 (A) OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT, IN AUTHORIZING THE TRANSPORTATION OF IMMEDIATE FAMILIES, LIMITS REIMBURSEMENT TO THOSE CASES "WHEN AUTHORIZED BY THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OR ESTABLISHMENT IN THE ORDER DIRECTING THE TRANSFER.' ACCORDINGLY, ORDERS AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF THE EMPLOYEE MAY NOT BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE THE TRANSPORTATION OF MEMBERS OF THE IMMEDIATE FAMILY AT ANY TIME AFTER THE EMPLOYEE HIMSELF HAS DEPARTED FROM HIS OLD STATION. CF. B-52644, OCTOBER 12, 1945.

QUESTION 8

IF THE TRANSFER ORDER AUTHORIZES THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE IMMEDIATE FAMILY OF THE EMPLOYEE BY THAT DESCRIPTION, IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR AUDIT PURPOSES IF THE EMPLOYEE'S VOUCHER CLAIMING REIMBURSEMENT STATES THE NAMES, AGES, AND RELATIONSHIP OF THE MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY SO TRANSPORTED. IT WILL NOT BE NECESSARY TO GIVE THE NAMES AND AGES IN THE TRANSFER ORDER ITSELF, ALTHOUGH THAT PROCEDURE WOULD NOT BE OBJECTIONABLE IF FEASIBLE.