B-72103, SEP. 11, 1962
Highlights
WHILE YOU WERE SERVING AS LIEUTENANT. YOUR CLAIM WAS ALLOWED AT THE RATE OF THREE CENTS PER MILE BY SETTLEMENT DATED MAY 15. YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THE RECORD DOES NOT ESTABLISH YOUR RIGHT TO MILEAGE AT EIGHT CENTS PER MILE SINCE THE TRAVEL DIRECTED BY THE ORDERS OF OCTOBER 4. WAS IN CONNECTION WITH THE MOVEMENT OF YOUR ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT AND THE RIGHT TO MILEAGE AS CLAIMED COULD ACCRUE ONLY IF YOU WERE IN A TRAVEL WITHOUT TROOPS STATUS IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE PAYMENT OF THAT ALLOWANCE IS AUTHORIZED BY STATUTE TO OFFICERS "WHEN TRAVELING UNDER COMPETENT ORDERS WITHOUT TROOPS.'. YOU WERE FURTHER ADVISED TO THAT EFFECT BY DECISION OF AUGUST 14. IN WHICH THERE WAS AGAIN CONSIDERED YOUR STATEMENT THAT OTHER OFFICERS WERE PAID MILEAGE FOR TRAVEL UNDER SIMILAR CONDITIONS AND IN WHICH YOU WERE AGAIN ADVISED THAT EVEN IF IT WERE ESTABLISHED THAT SUCH PAYMENTS WERE ERRONEOUS THEY WOULD NOT SERVE AS A BASIS FOR PAYMENT IN OTHER CASES.
B-72103, SEP. 11, 1962
TO MR. LOCKE H. TRIGG, JR:
YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 21, 1962, MAKES FURTHER REFERENCE TO YOUR CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL AMOUNT FOR TRAVEL FROM ROCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE, TO SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, WHILE YOU WERE SERVING AS LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE, UNITED STATES NAVAL RESERVE.
YOUR CLAIM WAS ALLOWED AT THE RATE OF THREE CENTS PER MILE BY SETTLEMENT DATED MAY 15, 1947, AND BY DECISIONS OF JULY 30, 1948, AND OCTOBER 25, 1948, YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THE RECORD DOES NOT ESTABLISH YOUR RIGHT TO MILEAGE AT EIGHT CENTS PER MILE SINCE THE TRAVEL DIRECTED BY THE ORDERS OF OCTOBER 4, 1944, WAS IN CONNECTION WITH THE MOVEMENT OF YOUR ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT AND THE RIGHT TO MILEAGE AS CLAIMED COULD ACCRUE ONLY IF YOU WERE IN A TRAVEL WITHOUT TROOPS STATUS IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE PAYMENT OF THAT ALLOWANCE IS AUTHORIZED BY STATUTE TO OFFICERS "WHEN TRAVELING UNDER COMPETENT ORDERS WITHOUT TROOPS.' YOU WERE FURTHER ADVISED TO THAT EFFECT BY DECISION OF AUGUST 14, 1962, IN WHICH THERE WAS AGAIN CONSIDERED YOUR STATEMENT THAT OTHER OFFICERS WERE PAID MILEAGE FOR TRAVEL UNDER SIMILAR CONDITIONS AND IN WHICH YOU WERE AGAIN ADVISED THAT EVEN IF IT WERE ESTABLISHED THAT SUCH PAYMENTS WERE ERRONEOUS THEY WOULD NOT SERVE AS A BASIS FOR PAYMENT IN OTHER CASES. IN YOUR PRESENT LETTER YOU SAY YOU WERE NOT GIVEN A CHOICE OF TRAVEL BY TROOP TRAIN OR OTHER METHODS; THAT YOU WERE TOLD TO BE IN SAN DIEGO ON A GIVEN DATE, AND THAT "THOSE OF US WHO WANTED TO USE OUR PRIVATE CARS WERE ISSUED THE NECESSARY GAS RATION BOOKS * * *.'
IN THE DECISION OF JULY 30, 1948, IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT:
"IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT OFFICERS ACTUALLY TRAVEL WITH THEIR ORGANIZATION IN ORDER TO PLACE THEM IN A "TRAVEL WITH TROOPS" STATUS UNDER THE QUOTED REGULATIONS, NOR IS IT MATERIAL THAT THEY PERFORM TRAVEL UNDER INDIVIDUAL ORDERS WHICH PERMIT TRAVEL BY A MODE OF TRANSPORTATION OTHER THAN THAT DIRECTED FOR THE TROOP MOVEMENT, IT BEING SUFFICIENT IF THE TRAVEL THEY PERFORM IS IN CONNECTION WITH A RELATED TROOP MOVEMENT * * * WHILE YOUR ORDERS OF OCTOBER 4, 1944, PURPORTED TO DIRECT TRAVEL TO SAN DIEGO * * * SUCH TRAVEL CLEARLY WAS DIRECTED IN CONNECTION WITH THE MOVEMENT OF YOUR ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT FROM THE EAST TO THE WEST COAST.'
YOUR LETTER FURNISHES NO EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL INFORMATION NOT PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED AND, THEREFORE, AFFORDS NO BASIS FOR MODIFICATION OR REVISION OF THE PRIOR ACTION IN YOUR CASE.