B-130231, FEB 12, 1957
Highlights
IT APPEARS THAT CAPTAIN MORRIS RETURNED FROM A STATION OVERSEAS AND WAS ASSIGNED TO DUTY ON FEBRUARY 10. WHERE THEY HAD LIVED WHILE HE WAS PERMANENTLY STATIONED OVERSEAS. IT WAS HELD THAT IF THE DEPENDENTS OF A MEMBER ARE AUTHORIZED TO MOVE AND ACTUALLY DO MOVE LOCALLY IN CONNECTION WITH A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION. A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE IS PAYABLE IF THE NECESSITY FOR RELOCATING HIS HOUSEHOLD IS CERTIFIED AS REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH 9003-6. THE SAME CONCLUSION WOULD APPEAR WARRANTED IN A SITUATION SUCH AS IS HERE INVOLVED. IF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE IS FURNISHED WHICH ESTABLISHES THAT THE CHANGE OF RESIDENCE WAS NECESSARY AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION. IT WAS RECOGNIZED IN OUR DECISION OF NOVEMBER 2.
B-130231, FEB 12, 1957
PRECIS-UNAVAILABLE
MR. T. A. JAMES, DISBURSING OFFICER:
VIA THE COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS (COP)
HEADQUARTERS, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
WASHINGTON 25, D.C.
BY FIRST ENDORSEMENT OF DECEMBER 28, 1956, THE COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS FORWARDED YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 26, 1956, WITH THE DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE CLAIM OF CAPTAIN JOHN L. MORRIS, USMC, REQUESTING AN ADVANCE DECISION AS TO HIS RIGHT TO SUCH ALLOWANCE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES DISCUSSED BELOW.
IT APPEARS THAT CAPTAIN MORRIS RETURNED FROM A STATION OVERSEAS AND WAS ASSIGNED TO DUTY ON FEBRUARY 10, 1956, AT HEADQUARTERS, U.S. MARINE CORPS; AND THAT ON MAY 15, 1956, HE MOVED HIS FAMILY FROM ONE ADDRESS IN FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA-- WHERE THEY HAD LIVED WHILE HE WAS PERMANENTLY STATIONED OVERSEAS-- TO ANOTHER ADDRESS IN THE SAME CITY.
IN DECISION OF AUGUST 13, 1956, 36 COMP.GEN. 113, IT WAS HELD THAT IF THE DEPENDENTS OF A MEMBER ARE AUTHORIZED TO MOVE AND ACTUALLY DO MOVE LOCALLY IN CONNECTION WITH A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE IS PAYABLE IF THE NECESSITY FOR RELOCATING HIS HOUSEHOLD IS CERTIFIED AS REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH 9003-6, JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. WHILE SUCH HOLDING RELATED TO A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION BETWEEN CITIES LOCATED WITHIN THE SAME METROPOLITAN AREA, THE SAME CONCLUSION WOULD APPEAR WARRANTED IN A SITUATION SUCH AS IS HERE INVOLVED, IF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE IS FURNISHED WHICH ESTABLISHES THAT THE CHANGE OF RESIDENCE WAS NECESSARY AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION. ALTHOUGH THE CITED REGULATIONS ONLY APPLY TO A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION BETWEEN PLACES LOCATED IN THE SAME METROPOLITAN AREA, IT WAS RECOGNIZED IN OUR DECISION OF NOVEMBER 2, 1956, B-129246, THAT WHERE A MEMBER'S DEPENDENTS ARE WITH HIM AT HIS NEW PERMANENT STATION AS A RESULT OF A LOCAL MOVE, HIS COMMANDING OFFICER COULD READILY DETERMINE FROM THE CONDITIONS OF HIS ASSIGNMENT AND OTHER FACTS IMMEDIATELY AT HAND, WHETHER THE CHANGE IN RESIDENCE WAS NECESSARY AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION. SINCE THIS WOULD BE SO WHETHER THE CHANGE WAS FROM A STATION OVERSEAS OR FROM ONE LOCATED NEARBY IN THE SAME METROPOLITAN AREA, THE COMMANDING OFFICER MIGHT PROPERLY CERTIFY AS TO THE NECESSITY FOR THE CHANGE OF RESIDENCE IN EITHER CASE.
THE ONLY INFORMATION ON THIS POINT FURNISHED IN THIS CASE IS THE STATEMENT BY CAPTAIN MORRIS THAT THE MOVE TO THE NEW ADDRESS WAS THE "RESULT OF BEING REORDERED TO HQMC." SUCH STATEMENT CONTAINS NO EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THE CHANGE OF STATION NECESSITATED A CHANGE OF RESIDENCE AND SINCE THE CHANGE OF RESIDENCE WAS NOT ACCOMPLISHED UNTIL MORE THAN THREE MONTHS AFTER HE REPORTED FOR DUTY AT HIS NEW STATION IT IS CONCLUDED THAT NO RIGHT TO A DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE ACCRUED AS A RESULT OF SUCH CHANGE.
ACCORDINGLY, ON THE PRESENT RECORD, YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PAY THE OFFICER'S CLAIM AND IT WILL BE RETAINED HERE.