A-88730, SEPTEMBER 18, 1937, 17 COMP. GEN. 265

A-88730, SEPTEMBER 18, 1937, 17 COMP. GEN. 265

TRANSPORTATION - DEPENDENTS - ARMY - CHANGES OF STATION INVOLVING OVERSEAS DEPARTMENTS WHERE AN ARMY OFFICER IS ASSIGNED TO AN OVERSEAS STATION SUCH AS THE PANAMA CANAL DEPARTMENT, THE HAWAIIAN DEPARTMENT, OR THE PHILIPPINE DEPARTMENT, THE ASSIGNMENT TO THE OVERSEAS DEPARTMENT IS THE CHANGE OF STATION ON WHICH TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS SHOULD BE COMPUTED BETWEEN THE OLD STATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND THE OVERSEAS DEPARTMENT, AND THE OFFICER IS NOT TO BE DEPRIVED OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM THE OLD STATION IN THE UNITED STATES TO THE OVERSEAS STATION BY REASON OF A CHANGE OF ASSIGNMENT OF DUTY STATIONS WITHIN THE OVERSEAS DEPARTMENT. COMP. GEN. 255, DISTINGUISHED.

DECISION BY ACTING COMPTROLLER GENERAL ELLIOTT, SEPTEMBER 18, 1937:

THERE IS FOR CONSIDERATION THE APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF WARRANT OFFICER OKEY B. ELLISON, UNITED STATES ARMY, OF SETTLEMENT DISALLOWING HIS CLAIM FOR THE COMMERCIAL COST OF TRANSPORTATION FOR HIS DEPENDENTS, CONSISTING OF THREE CHILDREN, CATHERINE AGED 14, OKEY AGED 13, AND JOHN AGED 11, FROM CHICAGO TO NEW YORK, N.Y., FROM WHICH PLACE THEY WERE FURNISHED TRANSPORTATION VIA ARMY TRANSPORT TO THE CANAL ZONE.

SPECIAL ORDERS, NO. 59, WAR DEPARTMENT, DATED MARCH 12, 1935, PARAGRAPH 18, RELIEVED WARRANT OFFICER ELLISON FROM ASSIGNMENT AND DUTIES AT HEADQUARTERS, SIXTH CORPS AREA, CHICAGO, ILL., AND DIRECTED HIM TO PROCEED TO NEW YORK CITY AND SAIL ON THE TRANSPORT SCHEDULED TO LEAVE THAT PORT JUNE 6, 1935, FOR PANAMA. UPON ARRIVAL IN PANAMA HE WAS FURTHER DIRECTED TO REPORT IN PERSON TO THE COMMANDING GENERAL, PANAMA CANAL DEPARTMENT, FOR ASSIGNMENT TO DUTY WITH THE QUARTERMASTER CORPS. HE WAS UPON REPORTING ASSIGNED FOR DUTY AT POST OF COROZAL, CANAL ZONE. EFFECTIVE MAY 16, 1936, HE WAS TRANSFERRED TO FORT DE LESSEPS, CANAL ZONE, FOR DUTY. HIS DEPENDENTS DID NOT TRAVEL WITH HIM. THEIR TRANSPORTATION TO THE CANAL ZONE WAS AUTHORIZED ON THE ARMY TRANSPORT SCHEDULED TO SALE JUNE 2, 1936, FROM NEW YORK CITY, AND THEY PERFORMED THE TRAVEL FROM CHICAGO TO NEW YORK MAY 29 AND 30, 1936.

THIS CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED BY SETTLEMENT NO. 0600575, DATED SEPTEMBER 29, 1936, FOR THE REASON THAT THE ORDERS TRANSFERRING HIM FROM POST OF COROZAL TO FORT DE LESSEPS CONSTITUTED A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, ENTITLING HIM ONLY TO REIMBURSEMENT NOT TO EXCEED THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION FROM HIS LAST PERMANENT STATION TO HIS NEW STATION.

BOTH THE FINANCE OFFICER AND THE CLAIMS DIVISION OF THIS OFFICE ACTED ON THE VIEW THAT THE DECISION OF OCTOBER 4, 1927, 7 COMP. GEN. 255, WAS APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE. IN THE CITED CASE THERE WAS CONSIDERED A PROVISION OF ARMY REGULATIONS DESIGNED TO PERMIT AN OFFICER TO ACCUMULATE RIGHTS TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS WHERE THE DEPENDENTS HAD NOT TRAVELED TO HIS LAST PRIOR PERMANENT STATION. THIS WAS NEGATIVED, BUT AT PAGE 262 IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT WHERE AN OFFICER WAS ORDERED TO REPORT TO THE COMMANDING GENERAL OF A CORPS AREA, AND UPON REPORTING AT CORPS AREA HEADQUARTERS IS ASSIGNED TO DUTY AT A STATION AWAY FROM HEADQUARTERS, THE SERIES OF ORDERS OPERATED AS A CHANGE OF STATION FROM WHERE HE WAS SERVING PRIOR TO THE ORDER TO REPORT TO THE COMMANDING GENERAL OF THE CORPS AREA TO THE PLACE TO WHICH ASSIGNED DUTY IN THE CORPS AREA AND NOT THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE CORPS AREA.

IN THE PRESENT CASE THE CLAIMANT WAS FIRST ASSIGNED TO THE POST OF COROZAL, 2 MILES FROM BALBOA ON THE PACIFIC SIDE OF THE ISTHMUS, AND THEREAFTER AND BEFORE DEPARTURE OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM HIS OLD STATION IN THE UNITED STATES, HE WAS ASSIGNED TO DUTY AT FORT DE LESSEPS IN THE VICINITY OF CRISTOBAL ON THE ATLANTIC SIDE OF THE ISTHMUS, AND THE DEPENDENTS ARRIVING IN THE CANAL ZONE FROM THE UNITED STATES WOULD ORDINARILY BE DISEMBARKED FROM THE TRANSPORT AT CRISTOBAL. THE CLAIMANT REQUESTED TRANSPORTATION FOR HIS DEPENDENTS TO HIS STATION IN THE PANAMA CANAL DEPARTMENT BEFORE THE CHANGE OF STATION TO FORT DE LESSEPS WAS ORDERED, AND THE DEPENDENTS DEPARTED FROM THE OLD STATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF JOINING THE CLAIMANT AT HIS NEW STATION WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME. SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES ONLY THE CLEAREST PROVISION OF THE LAW WOULD JUSTIFY REDUCING HIS RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION FOR HIS DEPENDENTS FROM SOME 3,000 MILES TO SOME 45 OR 50 MILES.

THE HOLDING IN 7 COMP. GEN. 255, HAS NO APPLICATION TO SUCH A SITUATION NOR TO AN ASSIGNMENT OF AN OFFICER TO AN OVERSEAS STATION. IT WAS NEVER CONTEMPLATED THAT BY REASON OF A CHANGE OF ASSIGNMENT OF DUTY STATIONS WITHIN AN OVERSEAS DEPARTMENT THE OFFICER SHOULD BE DEPRIVED OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS FROM THE OLD STATION IN THE UNITED STATES TO THE OVERSEAS STATION. FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS WHERE ASSIGNMENT IS TO AN OVERSEAS STATION SUCH AS THE PANAMA CANAL DEPARTMENT, THE HAWAIIAN DEPARTMENT, OR THE PHILIPPINE DEPARTMENT, THE ASSIGNMENT TO THE OVERSEAS DEPARTMENT IS THE CHANGE OF STATION ON WHICH TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS SHOULD BE COMPUTED BETWEEN THE OLD STATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND THE OVERSEAS DEPARTMENT. IF AFTER ARRIVAL OF THE DEPENDENTS IN THE OVERSEAS DEPARTMENT THERE ARE CHANGES OF ASSIGNED DUTY STATIONS WITHIN SUCH DEPARTMENT, THE DEPENDENTS WILL BE ENTITLED, ALSO, TO TRANSPORTATION WITHIN SUCH DEPARTMENT ON SUCH CHANGES OF STATION.

THE AMOUNT PROPERLY DUE FOR TRANSPORTATION OF THE DEPENDENTS FROM CHICAGO TO NEW YORK WILL BE ALLOWED IN A SETTLEMENT TO FOLLOW.