B-151394, JUN. 25, 1963

B-151394, JUN. 25, 1963

TO SP 5 ROBERT H. BELL:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 15, 1963, REQUESTING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF YOUR CLAIM FOR MILEAGE FROM MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE, NEW JERSEY, TO OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA.

YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED BY SETTLEMENT DATED MARCH 28, 1963, AND SUCH ACTION WAS SUSTAINED BY DECISION B-151394 OF MAY 8, 1963. IN THAT DECISION IT WAS STATED THAT BY ORDERS DATED AUGUST 20, 1962, YOU WERE RETURNED TO THE UNITED STATES FROM DUTY IN GERMANY ON SEPTEMBER 7, 1962, AND REASSIGNED TO DUTY AT FORT MYER, VIRGINIA. THIRTY DAYS' DELAY CHARGEABLE AS LEAVE WAS AUTHORIZED AND YOUR LEAVE ADDRESS WAS SHOWN AS SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA. IT WAS STATED THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY IN TRANSMITTING YOUR CLAIM TO THIS OFFICE STATED THAT ON OCTOBER 7, 1962, YOU REPORTED AT OAKLAND ARMY TERMINAL, CALIFORNIA, INSTEAD OF FORT MYER, VIRGINIA, AND THAT YOU APPLIED FOR REASSIGNMENT TO OAKLAND, WHICH ASSIGNMENT WAS ACCOMPLISHED BY ORDERS DATED OCTOBER 23, 1962. IT FURTHER WAS STATED THAT IN ANY EVENT IT IS APPARENT THAT YOU TRAVELED FROM MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE, NEW JERSEY, TO OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, IN A LEAVE STATUS AND NOT IN AN ORDERED TRAVEL STATUS AND THAT YOU RECEIVED ORDERS ASSIGNING YOU TO OAKLAND WHILE THERE. ALSO, YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THERE APPEARS TO BE NO BASIS ON WHICH THE PURPORTED RETROACTIVE MODIFICATION OF THE ORDERS OF OCTOBER 23, 1962, MAY BE ACCEPTED.

IN YOUR PRESENT LETTER YOU SAY THAT ON SEPTEMBER 8, 1962, YOU PROCEEDED TO WASHINGTON, D.C., IN A LEAVE STATUS TO REQUEST A COMPASSIONATE REASSIGNMENT TO ANY WEST COAST LOCATION WITH PREFERENCE OF ASSIGNMENT TO (1) PRESIDIO OF SAN FRANCISCO, (2) OAKLAND ARMY TERMINAL, OR (3) FORT ORD; THAT YOU VISITED THE OFFICE OF THE PERSONNEL OFFICER, ENLISTED PERSONNEL DIVISION, ON SEPTEMBER 10, 1962; AND THAT YOU STATED YOUR CASE TO A CAPTAIN WHO DIRECTED YOU TO PROCEED TO YOUR LEAVE ADDRESS AND WAIT FOR REASSIGNMENT ORDERS WHICH WOULD REACH YOU BEFORE YOUR LEAVE TERMINATED. YOU SAY THAT ON OR ABOUT OCTOBER 2, 1962, NOT HAVING RECEIVED REASSIGNMENT ORDERS, YOU WENT TO THE U.S. ARMY PERSONNEL CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, TO INQUIRE ABOUT YOUR NEXT STEP, AND THAT YOU DID NOT REQUEST REASSIGNMENT TO OAKLAND FROM YOUR LEAVE ADDRESS. YOU CONTEND THAT THE CAPTAIN'S DIRECTION THAT YOU PROCEED TO YOUR LEAVE ADDRESS AND AWAIT REASSIGNMENT ORDERS CONSTITUTES AUTHORITY FOR THE TRAVEL TO OAKLAND.

AS POINTED OUT IN THE DECISION, THE LAW PROVIDES THAT MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES ARE ENTITLED TO TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES ONLY FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED ON PUBLIC BUSINESS UNDER COMPETENT ORDERS. WHERE A MEMBER IS GRANTED LEAVE OF ABSENCE AT THE COMPLETION OF WHICH HE IS PERMITTED FOR HIS OWN CONVENIENCE TO REPORT AT A NEW STATION AT OR NEAR THE PLACE OF LEAVE, THE TRAVEL INVOLVED IS REGARDED AS HAVING BEEN PERFORMED INCIDENT TO LEAVE AND NOT ON PUBLIC BUSINESS AND THE EXPENSE THEREOF MUST BE BORNE BY THE TRAVELER. FURTHER, APPLICABLE REGULATIONS SPECIFICALLY PROVIDE THAT WHEN THE STATION OF A MEMBER IS CHANGED WHILE HE IS ON LEAVE OF ABSENCE, HE WILL, ON JOINING THE NEW STATION, BE ENTITLED ONLY TO TRAVEL ALLOWANCES FROM THE PLACE WHERE HE RECEIVED THE ORDERS DIRECTING THE CHANGE TO THE NEW STATION, NOT TO EXCEED THE DISTANCE FROM THE OLD STATION TO THE NEW STATION. WHILE PARAGRAPH 4156, CASE 9 (C) OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS FURTHER PROVIDES THAT IF A MEMBER UNDER PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS AVAILS HIMSELF OF LEAVE AND HIS ORDERS ARE CHANGED BEFORE EXPIRATION OF LEAVE TO DIRECT HIM TO PROCEED TO A NEW STATION HE WILL, UPON JOINING THE NEW STATION, BE ENTITLED TO ALLOWANCES FROM THE OLD STATION TO THE NEW, THIS REGULATION CONTEMPLATES A CHANGE BASED UPON NEEDS OF THE SERVICE AND THERE IS NOTHING TO SHOW THAT THE NEEDS OF THE SERVICE NECESSITATED A CHANGE OF STATION FOR YOU FROM FORT MYER TO OAKLAND. INSOFAR AS THE PRESENT RECORD SHOWS, YOU WERE ASSIGNED TO OAKLAND SOLELY BECAUSE YOU REQUESTED AN ASSIGNMENT THERE FOR COMPASSIONATE REASONS. TRAVEL INCIDENT TO A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION SOLELY FOR COMPASSIONATE OR HUMANITARIAN REASONS IS NOT TRAVEL ON PUBLIC BUSINESS BUT IS FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE MEMBER AND REIMBURSEMENT THEREFOR IS NOT AUTHORIZED. B-147646, JULY 11, 1962, AND B-146432, SEPTEMBER 13, 1961, COPIES ENCLOSED.

IT APPEARS THAT ON THE BASIS OF YOUR REQUEST FOR A COMPASSIONATE TRANSFER TO A WEST COAST STATION, YOU WERE VERBALLY ADVISED TO PROCEED TO YOUR LEAVE ADDRESS AND TOLD THAT ORDERS ASSIGNING YOU TO SUCH STATION WOULD REACH YOU BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF YOUR LEAVE. THESE VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS, HOWEVER, DID NOT PURPORT TO CONSTITUTE ORDERS DIRECTING TRAVEL AT PUBLIC EXPENSE BUT MERELY CONFIRMED YOUR LEAVE STATUS WITH INFORMATION THAT YOU WOULD RECEIVE ORDERS ASSIGNING YOU TO A WEST COAST STATION. THIS WAS FOLLOWED BY ORDERS ASSIGNING YOU TO OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, AFTER YOU REACHED THERE.

SINCE YOU TRAVELED TO OAKLAND WHILE ON LEAVE GRANTED IN THE ORDERS DATED AUGUST 20, 1962, AND NOT INCIDENT TO ORDERS DIRECTING YOUR TRAVEL TO THAT CITY ON PUBLIC BUSINESS, AND SINCE YOU WERE AT OAKLAND WHEN ORDERED TO DUTY THERE UPON TERMINATION OF LEAVE INCIDENT TO YOUR REQUEST FOR A COMPASSIONATE TRANSFER TO A WEST COAST STATION, IT SEEMS EVIDENT THAT THE CHANGE IN ASSIGNMENT FROM FORT MYER TO OAKLAND WAS FOR YOUR PERSONAL CONVENIENCE RATHER THAN BECAUSE OF THE NEEDS OF THE SERVICE. THEREFORE, SINCE THE TRAVEL DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN PERFORMED ON PUBLIC BUSINESS, THERE IS NO BASIS FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR MILEAGE FOR TRAVEL FROM MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE, NEW JERSEY, TO OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA.

CONSEQUENTLY, FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS, THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM IS AGAIN SUSTAINED.