B-82471, APRIL 13, 1949, 28 COMP. GEN. 567

B-82471: Apr 13, 1949

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

ARE ASSIGNED TO A NEW PERMANENT STATION MAY NOT BE REGARDED AS ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TRAVEL OF THEIR DEPENDENTS FROM BOTH THE OLD STATION TO HOME OF RECORD AND FROM THE OLD STATION TO THE NEW STATION. REIMBURSEMENT IS AUTHORIZED ON THE BASIS OF EITHER TRAVEL FROM LAST PERMANENT STATION TO HOME OF RECORD. WHICHEVER IS GREATER. 1949: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 24. FROM THE COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS REQUESTING DECISION AS TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH REIMBURSEMENT IS AUTHORIZED FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS OF MARINE CORPS PERSONNEL UPON RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY AS RESERVISTS AND SUBSEQUENT ENLISTMENT IN THE REGULAR MARINE CORPS. WHOSE HOME OF RECORD ON ASSIGNMENT TO ACTIVE DUTY WAS SAN FRANCISCO.

B-82471, APRIL 13, 1949, 28 COMP. GEN. 567

TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS - RESERVISTS ENLISTING IN REGULAR MARINE CORPS MARINE CORPS RESERVE ENLISTED PERSONNEL WHO, UPON DISCHARGE AND SUBSEQUENT ENLISTMENT IN THE REGULAR MARINE CORPS AT THE PLACE OF DISCHARGE WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE, ARE ASSIGNED TO A NEW PERMANENT STATION MAY NOT BE REGARDED AS ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TRAVEL OF THEIR DEPENDENTS FROM BOTH THE OLD STATION TO HOME OF RECORD AND FROM THE OLD STATION TO THE NEW STATION, OR FROM BOTH THE OLD STATION TO HOME OF RECORD AND FROM SAID HOME TO THE NEW STATION; HOWEVER, REIMBURSEMENT IS AUTHORIZED ON THE BASIS OF EITHER TRAVEL FROM LAST PERMANENT STATION TO HOME OF RECORD, OR FROM LAST PERMANENT STATION TO HOME OF RECORD, OR FROM LAST PERMANENT STATION TO NEW PERMANENT STATION, WHICHEVER IS GREATER.

ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL YATES TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, APRIL 13, 1949:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 24, 1948, (FILE JAG.II.WJG.MH L20-4/KW), ENCLOSING LETTER OF JULY 16, 1948, FROM THE COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS REQUESTING DECISION AS TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH REIMBURSEMENT IS AUTHORIZED FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS OF MARINE CORPS PERSONNEL UPON RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY AS RESERVISTS AND SUBSEQUENT ENLISTMENT IN THE REGULAR MARINE CORPS, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH 2 OF SAID ENCLOSURE, AS FOLLOWS:

(A) AN ENLISTED MAN, SECOND PAY GRADE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE, WHOSE HOME OF RECORD ON ASSIGNMENT TO ACTIVE DUTY WAS SAN FRANCISCO,CALIFORNIA, WAS DISCHARGED AT LAST PERMANENT DUTY STATION, MARINE BARRACKS, WASHINGTON, D.C., ON 16 MAY, 1946 AND ENLISTED IN THE REGULAR MARINE CORPS, SECOND PAY GRADE, ON 26 JULY, 1946, AT WASHINGTON, D.C., RECEIVING ORDERS WITH ISSUE DATE 26 JULY 1946 DIRECTING HIS TRANSFER TO PERMANENT DUTY, MARINE CORPS BASE, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA. THE ORDERS DID NOT REFLECT EVIDENCE OF A PERMISSIVE CHANGE OF STATION BUT INDICATED THE TRANSFER TO SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, WAS IN THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE. THE ENLISTED MAN SUBMITTED A REIMBURSEMENT CLAIM FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED BY HIS DEPENDENT WIFE FROM WASHINGTON, D.C., TO SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, BETWEEN THE DATES OF 27 MAY AND 2 JUNE, 1946 AND FROM WASHINGTON, D.C., TO SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, BETWEEN THE DATES OF 27 JULY AND 2 AUGUST, 1946. DECISION IS REQUESTED AS TO WHAT REIMBURSEMENT IS LEGALLY ALLOWABLE FOR THE TRAVEL DESCRIBED.

(B) AN ENLISTED MAN, FIRST PAY GRADE MARINE CORPS RESERVE, WHOSE HOME OF RECORD ON ASSIGNMENT TO ACTIVE DUTY WAS BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, RECEIVED ORDERS DATED 25 MAY, 1946, DIRECTING THAT HE PROCEED FROM HIS PERMANENT DUTY STATION, MARINE BARRACKS, WASHINGTON, D.C., TO MARINE CORPS SEPARATION CENTER, MARINE BARRACKS, QUANTICO, VIRGINIA, FOR PROCESSING AND DISCHARGE. THE FORWARDING OF STAFF RETURNS TO MARINE BARRACKS, QUANTICO, VIRGINIA (DETACHMENT FROM THE PERMANENT DUTY STATION), WAS DIRECTED IN THE ORDERS. THE MAN WAS DISCHARGED AT QUANTICO, VIRGINIA, ON 10 JUNE, 1946 AND ENLISTED IN THE REGULAR MARINE CORPS, FIRST PAY GRADE, ON 11 JUNE, 1946 AT QUANTICO, VIRGINIA, RECEIVING ORDERS WITH ISSUE DATE 11 JUNE 1946 DIRECTING HIS TRANSFER TO PERMANENT DUTY AT CAMP LEJEUNE, NORTH CAROLINA. THE ORDERS DID NOT REFLECT EVIDENCE OF A PERMISSIVE CHANGE OF STATION BUT INDICATED THE TRANSFER TO CAMP LEJEUNE WAS IN THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE. THE ENLISTED MAN SUBMITTED A REIMBURSEMENT CLAIM FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED BY HIS DEPENDENT WIFE FROM WASHINGTON, D.C., TO BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, BETWEEN THE DATES OF 26 AND 28 MAY, 1946 AND FROM BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, TO CAMP LEJEUNE, NORTH CAROLINA, BETWEEN THE DATES OF 14 AND 16 JUNE, 1946. CLAIMANT STATED IN THE CLAIM THAT AT THE TIME HE RECEIVED ORDERS TO THE SEPARATION CENTER IT WAS HIS INTENTION TO RETURN TO CIVILIAN LIFE AND THAT DURING HIS STAY AT THE SEPARATION CENTER HE CHANGED HIS MIND. DECISION IS REQUESTED AS TO WHAT REIMBURSEMENT IS LEGALLY ALLOWABLE FOR THE TRAVEL DESCRIBED.

THE COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS STATES IN HIS LETTER OF JULY 16, 1948, THAT PARAGRAPH 8071, SUBPARAGRAPHS 1 AND 2, U.S. NAVY TRAVEL INSTRUCTIONS, PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE BASIS FOR DETERMINING WHETHER PERSONNEL OF THE REGULAR MARINE CORPS ARE ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS INCIDENT TO A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION EFFECTED SUBSEQUENT TO DISCHARGE AND REENLISTMENT, BUT THAT THE RIGHT TO SUCH TRANSPORTATION IS NOT SO CLEARLY DEFINED WITH RESPECT TO PERSONNEL WHO ARE DISCHARGED FROM A RESERVE COMPONENT AND THEREAFTER ENLIST IN THE REGULAR SERVICE. THE SAID PARAGRAPH 8071 OF THE U.S. NAVY TRAVEL INSTRUCTIONS PROVIDES, IN PERTINENT PART, AS FOLLOWS:

1. * * * WHEN A MAN REENLISTS UNDER CONTINUOUS SERVICE (WITHIN 90 DAYS FROM DATE OF DISCHARGE) AT THE PLACE AT WHICH HE WAS DISCHARGED HE IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS ON SUBSEQUENT TRANSFER TO A NEW PERMANENT DUTY STATION ON THE BASIS OF TRAVEL FROM THE OLD PERMANENT DUTY STATION TO THE NEW STATION.

2. * * * WHEN A MAN REENLISTS UNDER BROKEN SERVICE (MORE THAN 90 DAYS FROM DATE OF DISCHARGE), OR AT A PLACE OTHER THAN THE ONE FROM WHICH HE WAS DISCHARGED, HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION AFTER REENLISTMENT.

IT WAS HELD IN DECISION OF FEBRUARY 1, 1946, 25 COMP. GEN. 571, THAT THERE WAS NOTHING IN THE PROVISIONS OF THE ARMED FORCES VOLUNTARY RECRUITMENT ACT OF 1945, 59 STAT. 538, WHICH WOULD AUTHORIZE EXTENDING NAVY TRAVEL INSTRUCTIONS SIMILAR TO THOSE JUST QUOTED TO COVER ALL CASES OF ENLISTMENT OR REENLISTMENT IN THE REGULAR MARINE CORPS WITHIN 90 DAYS OF DISCHARGE. THAT DECISION, HOWEVER, DID NOT PARTICULARLY DELINEATE THE CASES IN WHICH THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AND HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS MIGHT OTHERWISE BE VIEWED AS AUTHORIZED.

SECTION 12 OF THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, 56 STAT. 364, 365, 366, PROVIDES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OF CERTAIN RESERVE PERSONNEL FROM HOME TO FIRST STATION UPON ASSIGNMENT TO ACTIVE DUTY AND FROM LAST STATION TO HOME UPON RELIEF THEREFROM, WHEREAS NO SUCH AUTHORITY EXISTS WITH RESPECT TO PERSONNEL IN THE REGULAR SERVICE. THUS, IN THE CASE OF RESERVE PERSONNEL RELEASED FROM ACTIVE DUTY, THERE IS A CLEAR RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM LAST PERMANENT DUTY STATION TO HOME OF RECORD. SINCE ENLISTMENT IN THE REGULAR SERVICE DOES NOT ENTITLE PERSONNEL TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM HOME TO FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION, AND SINCE DISCHARGE FROM THE REGULAR SERVICE DOES NOT ENTITLE PERSONNEL TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM LAST PERMANENT STATION TO HOME, THE AUTHORIZED ALLOWANCE INCIDENT TO A CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION SUBSEQUENT TO DISCHARGE AND REENLISTMENT IN THE REGULAR SERVICE WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE, WHICH HAS BEEN HELD TO MEAN REENLISTMENT WITHIN 90 DAYS AT THE STATION AT WHICH DISCHARGE (B-13388, NOVEMBER 27, 1940), NECESSARILY IS ON THE BASIS OF TRAVEL FROM THE OLD DUTY STATION TO THE NEW DUTY STATION. 8 COMP. GEN. 76. HOWEVER, A DIFFERENT SITUATION EXISTS WITH RESPECT TO RESERVISTS. RESERVE PERSONNEL DISCHARGED OR RELEASED FROM ACTIVE DUTY, PRIOR TO THE END OF THE PERIOD THEY OTHERWISE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO SERVE AS RESERVISTS, FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF ENLISTMENT OR REENLISTMENT IN THE REGULAR SERVICE, ARE NOT ENTITLED TO A TRAVEL ALLOWANCE INCIDENT TO SUCH DISCHARGE OR RELEASE (25 COMP. GEN. 285), AND THER APPEARS NO AUTHORITY FOR TRANSPORTATION OF THEIR DEPENDENTS FROM LAST STATION TO HOME BY VIRTUE OF SUCH CHANGE IN STATUS. HOWEVER, WHERE SUCH ENLISTMENT IS ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE, AND ASSIGNMENT TO A NEW PERMANENT STATION IS INVOLVED, TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS IS AUTHORIZED AS FOR A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ON THE BASES OF TRAVEL FROM HE OLD DUTY STATION TO THE NEW DUTY STATION. CF. B-67010 OF JULY 9, 1947. WHERE RESERVISTS ARE DISCHARGED OR RELEASED FROM ACTIVE DUTY IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF EVENTS AND THE DEPENDENTS ARE AT A POINT OTHER THAN THE RESERVIST'S HOME OF RECORD, THE RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS ON THE BASIS OF TRAVEL FROM THE LAST PERMANENT STATION TO HOME OF RECORD IS CLEARLY PRESCRIBED BY SECTION 102 OF THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, SUPRA. WHERE SUCH DISCHARGE IS FOLLOWED, HOWEVER, BY ENLISTMENT IN THE REGULAR SERVICE AT THE PLACE AT WHICH DISCHARGED, WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE, THAT IS, WITHIN 90 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF DISCHARGE OR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY, AND A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION IS INVOLVED, WHILE THE MATTER IS NOT ENTIRELY FREE FROM DOUBT, IT MAY BE CONCLUDED THAT, IF THE PERSONNEL SO ELECT, TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS MAY BE FURNISHED ON THE BASIS OF TRAVEL FROM THE OLD PERMANENT STATION TO THE NEW PERMANENT STATION, SUBJECT TO ADJUSTMENT FOR ANY PRIOR TRAVEL AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE INCIDENT TO THE DISCHARGE OR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY.

IN THE CASES REFERRED TO BY THE COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS, IT APPEARS THAT THE MARINES INVOLVED WERE DISCHARGED FROM THE MARINE CORPS RESERVE IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF EVENTS AND NOT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENLISTMENT IN THE REGULAR MARINE CORPS; THAT EACH MARINE THEREAFTER ENLISTED IN THE REGULAR MARINE CORPS AT THE PLACE AT WHICH DISCHARGED WITHOUT A BREAK IN SERVICE; THAT THE WIFE OF EACH TRAVELED FROM THE LAST STATION TO HOME OF RECORD INCIDENT TO THE DISCHARGE, AND THAT REIMBURSEMENT IS CLAIMED FOR SUCH TRAVEL IN EACH CASE. HOWEVER, IN THE CASE SET FORTH AS EXAMPLE (A), THE WIFE HAVING SUBSEQUENTLY RETURNED TO THE OLD STATION AND HAVING TRAVELED FROM THAT POINT TO THE NEW STATION FOLLOWING THE ENLISTMENT AND ORDERS TO THE NEW STATION, REIMBURSEMENT IS CLAIMED ALSO FOR TRAVEL FROM THE OLD STATION TO THE NEW STATION, WHILE IN THE CASE SET FORTH AS EXAMPLE (B), THE WIFE HAVING FURTHER TRAVELED FROM THE HOME OF RECORD TO THE NEW DUTY STATION FOLLOWING THE ENLISTMENT AND ORDERS TO THE NEW STATION, REIMBURSEMENT IS CLAIMED ALSO FOR SAID TRAVEL. REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN THOSE CASES FROM OLD STATION TO HOME AND FROM OLD STATION TO NEW STATION, OR FROM OLD STATION TO HOME AND FROM HOME TO NEW STATION, IS NOT AUTHORIZED. HOWEVER, APPLYING WHAT HAS BEEN SAID ABOVE TO SAID CASES, REIMBURSEMENT IN EACH CASE IS AUTHORIZED ON THE BASIS OF EITHER TRAVEL FROM LAST PERMANENT STATION TO HOME OF RECORD, OR FROM LAST PERMANENT STATION TO NEW PERMANENT STATION, WHICHEVER IS GREATER.