B-147175, MAY 23, 1962

B-147175: May 23, 1962

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Shirley Jones
(202) 512-8156
jonessa@gao.gov

 

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

THE TRAVEL IN QUESTION IS THAT WHICH YOU PERFORMED DIRECTLY FROM YOUR RESIDENCE IN BROOKLYN. YOUR SPECIFIC CLAIMS WERE DISALLOWED FOR THE REASONS STATED IN OUR CLAIMS DIVISION SETTLEMENT DATED AUGUST 30. THAT THE ISSUE IN THE ENTIRE CASE IS WHETHER YOU WERE ON TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT OR WHETHER YOU HAD RECEIVED A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION PRIOR TO JULY 27. FOR WHAT AMOUNT OF YOUR TRAVEL COSTS YOU WERE ENTITLED TO BE REIMBURSED IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES. WHICH ARE DESCRIBED IN YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 26. AS YOU WERE ADVISED IN THE SETTLEMENT LETTER OF AUGUST 30. WE NOW HAVE OUR AUDITORS' REPORT SHOWING THAT ON APRIL 17. YOU WERE INTERVIEWED AS REQUESTED. REGARDING YOUR STATEMENTS CONCERNING COSTS OF TEMPORARY DUTY TRAVEL AS OPPOSED TO COST OF COMMUTING TO PERMANENT DUTY STATION WE SHOULD INFORM YOU THAT AN EMPLOYEE'S OFFICIAL OR PERMANENT DUTY STATION GENERALLY IS THAT PLACE AT WHICH HE IS EXPECTED OR IS SCHEDULED FOR A CONSIDERABLE PERIOD IN ADVANCE TO SPEND THE GREATER PART OF HIS ASSIGNED DUTY TIME.

B-147175, MAY 23, 1962

TO MR. GEORGE BAYRON:

YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 26, 1961, REQUESTED OUR FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF YOUR CLAIM FOR $1,109.96 REPRESENTING CERTAIN MILEAGE, AND TOLL CHARGES YOU INCURRED INCIDENT TO THE PRIVATE AUTOMOBILE TRAVEL YOU PERFORMED AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE ARMY AUDIT AGENCY, 290 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, NEW YORK.

THE TRAVEL IN QUESTION IS THAT WHICH YOU PERFORMED DIRECTLY FROM YOUR RESIDENCE IN BROOKLYN, NEW YORK, TO YOUR ASSIGNED DUTY POINTS IN TETERBORO, NEW JERSEY, DURING THE PERIOD AUGUST 20, 1958, TO AUGUST 31, 1960. YOUR SPECIFIC CLAIMS WERE DISALLOWED FOR THE REASONS STATED IN OUR CLAIMS DIVISION SETTLEMENT DATED AUGUST 30, 1961. YOU SAY, HOWEVER, THAT THE ISSUE IN THE ENTIRE CASE IS WHETHER YOU WERE ON TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT OR WHETHER YOU HAD RECEIVED A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION PRIOR TO JULY 27, 1960, AND FOR WHAT AMOUNT OF YOUR TRAVEL COSTS YOU WERE ENTITLED TO BE REIMBURSED IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH ARE DESCRIBED IN YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 26, 1961, AND IN PRIOR CORRESPONDENCE. AS YOU WERE ADVISED IN THE SETTLEMENT LETTER OF AUGUST 30, 1961, OUR SETTLEMENT ACTIONS AND DECISIONS NECESSARILY MUST BE BASED UPON THE WRITTEN RECORD AS FURNISHED BY BOTH THE CLAIMANT AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE. HOWEVER, IN VIEW OF YOUR INSISTENCE THAT WE AFFORD YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO FULLY PROVE YOUR REPRESENTATIONS, WE REQUESTED OUR AUDITORS AT OUR NEW YORK REGIONAL OFFICE TO EXTEND YOU THAT PRIVILEGE, AND TO FURNISH US A DETAILED REPORT REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD AND ANY CONTENTIONS YOU DESIRED TO PRESENT PERTINENT TO THE TRAVEL IN QUESTION. WE NOW HAVE OUR AUDITORS' REPORT SHOWING THAT ON APRIL 17, 1962, YOU WERE INTERVIEWED AS REQUESTED, BUT THAT YOU HAD NO ADDITIONAL DATA TO SUBMIT IN SUPPORT OF YOUR CLAIM, AND SUBMITTED NO DOCUMENTS OR PAPERS SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE RECORD CONSIDERED IN OUR DECISIONS OF OCTOBER 9, 1961, AND DECEMBER 7, 1961, B-147175, TO YOU, WHICH, FOR THE REASONS STATED THEREIN, SUSTAINED THE SETTLEMENT OF AUGUST 30, 1961.

REGARDING YOUR STATEMENTS CONCERNING COSTS OF TEMPORARY DUTY TRAVEL AS OPPOSED TO COST OF COMMUTING TO PERMANENT DUTY STATION WE SHOULD INFORM YOU THAT AN EMPLOYEE'S OFFICIAL OR PERMANENT DUTY STATION GENERALLY IS THAT PLACE AT WHICH HE IS EXPECTED OR IS SCHEDULED FOR A CONSIDERABLE PERIOD IN ADVANCE TO SPEND THE GREATER PART OF HIS ASSIGNED DUTY TIME, WHICH MAY BE ESTABLISHED ON THE FACTS NOTWITHSTANDING A PRELIMINARY ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGNATION OF SOME OTHER PLACE OR A SUPERVISORY HEADQUARTERS. OUR DECISIONS CONSISTENTLY HAVE ADHERED TO THAT RULE. COMP. GEN. 289, 32 ID. 87, AND 36 ID. 161, 162. UPON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH CHANGE OF STATION IN FACT FROM TEMPORARY DUTY TO PERMANENT (WHICH MAY BE INDEFINITE AS TO DURATION) AN EMPLOYEE GENERALLY IS NOT THEREAFTER ENTITLED TO ANY REIMBURSEMENT OF HIS COSTS OF COMMUTING DAILY FROM HIS RESIDENCE TO SUCH PLACE OF PERMANENT DUTY.

THEREFORE, AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE PRESENT RECORD, INCLUDING THE DETAILED REPORT OF OUR AUDITOR'S INTERVIEW WITH YOU, WE FIND NO BASIS FOR ALLOWANCE OF ANY PART OF YOUR CLAIM. OUR DECISIONS OF OCTOBER 9 AND DECEMBER 7, 1961, ARE AFFIRMED.

Jan 19, 2021

Jan 14, 2021

Looking for more? Browse all our products here