B-85594, JULY 1, 1949, 29 COMP. GEN. 4

B-85594: Jul 1, 1949

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS - ENLISTMENT AT POINT OTHER THAN POINT OF DISCHARGE A PERSON WHO ENLISTED IN THE ARMY AT A POINT OTHER THAN THE ONE AT WHICH HE WAS DISCHARGED FROM THE MARINE CORPS. WHO WAS ASSIGNED TO ACTIVE DUTY AT THE PLACE OF ENLISTMENT. - IS NOT ENTITLED. TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENT WIFE FROM A SELECTED PLACE WHERE SHE WAS SENT AT PERSONAL EXPENSE UPON OVERSEAS ASSIGNMENT TO THE NEW DUTY STATION. REQUESTING DECISION WHETHER YOU ARE AUTHORIZED TO MAKE PAYMENT ON A VOUCHER SUBMITTED THEREWITH. THE ENLISTED MAN WAS DISCHARGED FROM THE SERVICE AT GREAT LAKES. WAS ASSIGNED TO DUTY AT THE LATTER PLACE BY ORDERS OF THE SAME DATE. - THE PLACE TO WHICH SHE WAS SENT AT OWN EXPENSE FOLLOWING RECEIPT OF ORDERS TO OVERSEAS DUTY DURING HIS SERVICE IN THE MARINE CORPS.

B-85594, JULY 1, 1949, 29 COMP. GEN. 4

TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS - ENLISTMENT AT POINT OTHER THAN POINT OF DISCHARGE A PERSON WHO ENLISTED IN THE ARMY AT A POINT OTHER THAN THE ONE AT WHICH HE WAS DISCHARGED FROM THE MARINE CORPS, AND WHO WAS ASSIGNED TO ACTIVE DUTY AT THE PLACE OF ENLISTMENT--- THERE BEING NO ORDERED CHANGE OF STATION--- IS NOT ENTITLED, EITHER UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, AS FOR A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, OR UNDER THE ACT OF JUNE 5, 1942, AUTHORIZING DEPENDENT TRANSPORTATION FROM DESIGNATED LOCATIONS TO STATIONS UNRESTRICTED AS TO DEPENDENTS, TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENT WIFE FROM A SELECTED PLACE WHERE SHE WAS SENT AT PERSONAL EXPENSE UPON OVERSEAS ASSIGNMENT TO THE NEW DUTY STATION.

ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL YATES TO CAPT. H. W. KASSERMAN, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, JULY 1, 1949:

THERE HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY SECOND INDORSEMENT FROM THE CHIEF OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, DATED APRIL 12, 1949, YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 1, 1949, REQUESTING DECISION WHETHER YOU ARE AUTHORIZED TO MAKE PAYMENT ON A VOUCHER SUBMITTED THEREWITH, STATED IN FAVOR OF SERGEANT RALPH J. ATCHLEY, COVERING REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES OF HIS DEPENDENT WIFE'S TRAVEL FROM SPRINGFIELD, MINNESOTA, TO FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA.

IT APPEARS THAT WHILE SERVING AS A STAFF SERGEANT, U.S. MARINE CORPS, THE ENLISTED MAN WAS DISCHARGED FROM THE SERVICE AT GREAT LAKES, ILLINOIS, ON JUNE 16, 1947, FOLLOWING HIS RETURN FROM DUTY IN CHINA; AND THAT HE ENLISTED IN THE REGULAR ARMY IN THE GRADE OF STAFF SERGEANT AT FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA, ON JUNE 17, 1947, AND WAS ASSIGNED TO DUTY AT THE LATTER PLACE BY ORDERS OF THE SAME DATE. HE STATES THAT HIS WIFE TRAVELED FROM SPRINGFIELD, MINNESOTA--- THE PLACE TO WHICH SHE WAS SENT AT OWN EXPENSE FOLLOWING RECEIPT OF ORDERS TO OVERSEAS DUTY DURING HIS SERVICE IN THE MARINE CORPS--- TO ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA, AT PERSONAL EXPENSE DURING THE PERIOD JUNE 16 TO 18, 1947.

ALTHOUGH IT IS WELL ESTABLISHED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12 OF THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, 56 STAT. 364, AUTHORIZING THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OF ELIGIBLE MILITARY PERSONNEL AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE FROM HOME TO FIRST DUTY STATION, DO NOT APPLY TO PERSONNEL ENTERING THE REGULAR MILITARY ESTABLISHMENTS (SEE 25 COMP. GEN. 571, AND 26 ID. 18), IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT, WHERE AN ENLISTED MAN IS DISCHARGED AND REENLISTS UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH PERMIT HIS SERVICE TO BE REGARDED AS CONTINUOUS, HIS RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS CONTINUES ON THE SAME BASIS AS THOUGH HE HAD NOT BEEN DISCHARGED. IN CONSONANCE THEREWITH, PARAGRAPH 31, ARMY REGULATIONS 35 4880, MAY 13, 1947--- SEE ALSO PARAGRAPH 102.1, TM 14- 503, CHANGE NO. 1, DATED DECEMBER 1, 1946--- PROVIDES THAT A DISCHARGE OF AN ENLISTED MAN OF THE FIRST THREE GRADES FOR ENLISTMENT OR REENLISTMENT IN THE REGULAR ARMY ON THE DAY FOLLOWING DISCHARGE IS NOT CONSIDERED A BREAK IN ACTIVE SERVICE SO FAR AS SUCH PERSON'S RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS IS CONCERNED, AND THAT IN SUCH CASE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS AUTHORIZED WHERE A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION IS INVOLVED IN CONNECTION WITH ENLISTMENT OR REENLISTMENT, INCLUDING THE MOVEMENT OF DEPENDENTS FROM THE PLACE TO WHICH THE DEPENDENTS WERE TRANSPORTED UNDER THE ACT OF JUNE 5, 1942, 56 STAT. 314, 315, TO HIS PRESENT OR SUBSEQUENT STATION.

HOWEVER, AS STATED IN A-8328, MARCH 30, 1925, CITED IN 8 COMP. GEN. 76, SO FAR AS TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS IS CONCERNED, CONTROLLING STATUTES CONTEMPLATE ORDERED CHANGES OF STATION AND WHERE A MAN REENLISTS IN CONTINUOUS SERVICE AT THE STATION AT WHICH DISCHARGED--- OR AT SOME OTHER POINT DESIGNATED IN ORDERS--- THE QUESTION OF CHANGE OF STATION IS ENTIRELY WITHIN THE CONTROL OF THE DEPARTMENT, WHEREAS THE CASE IS OTHERWISE WHERE THE MAN GOES TO A DISTANT POINT TO REENLIST AND IS ASSIGNED TO A NEARBY POST FOR DUTY. HENCE, THE RULE AUTHORIZING TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS WHERE A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION IS INVOLVED IN CONNECTION WITH REENLISTMENT DOES NOT APPLY WHERE, EXCEPT WHEN IN COMPLIANCE WITH ORDERS, REENLISTMENT IS AT A STATION OTHER THAN THE ONE AT WHICH DISCHARGED. IN THIS CONNECTION, PARAGRAPH 8071-2, U.S. NAVY TRAVEL INSTRUCTIONS, APPLICABLE TO THE MARINE CORPS, PROVIDES THAT WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL REENLISTS AT A PLACE OTHER THAN THE ONE AT WHICH DISCHARGED, HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS TO HIS FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION AFTER REENLISTMENT.

SINCE SERGEANT ATCHLEY WAS NOT DISCHARGED UNDER ARMY REGULATIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENLISTING OR REENLISTING, THE RECORD INDICATING THAT HE WAS DISCHARGED UNDER THE DEMOBILIZATION PROCEDURES FOR THE MARINE CORPS SET FORTH IN ALMAR 8-47, AND SINCE HE ENLISTED AT A POINT OTHER THAN THE ONE AT WHICH DISCHARGED, IT SEEMS CLEAR THAT NO RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENT, AS FOR A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, ACCRUED TO HIM UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, SUPRA, UPON ENLISTING IN THE REGULAR ARMY AT FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA, IN THE GRADE OF STAFF SERGEANT ON JUNE 17, 1947. FURTHER, SINCE THE PROVISION IN THE ACT OF JUNE 5, 1942, AUTHORIZING TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM DESIGNATED LOCATIONS TO STATIONS AT WHICH RESTRICTIONS AGAINST DEPENDENTS DO NOT APPLY LIKEWISE CONTEMPLATES STATIONS TO WHICH THE PERSONNEL CONCERNED HAVE BEEN ORDERED, IT NECESSARILY FOLLOWS THAT NO RIGHT ACCRUED TO SERGEANT ATCHLEY, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SAID ACT, TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENT FROM SPRINGFIELD, MINNESOTA, TO FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA, AS FOR TRAVEL FROM A DESIGNATED LOCATION TO A DUTY STATION AFTER RETURN FROM OVERSEAS.

ACCORDINGLY, PAYMENT ON THE VOUCHER, WHICH IS RETAINED IN THIS OFFICE, IS NOT AUTHORIZED.