B-130926, MAY 29, 1957

B-130926, MAY 29, 1957

TO COMMANDER EDGAR F. HAZLETON, JR.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 6, 1957, AND ENCLOSURE, REQUESTING REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT DATED NOVEMBER 1, 1956, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR PER DIEM WHILE ON OPERATIONAL DEPLOYMENT AS A MEMBER OF PATROL SQUADRON 47. YOUR CLAIM WAS FOR PER DIEM FOR DUTY PERFORMED WHILE IN JAPAN ON TEMPORARY ADDITIONAL DUTY DURING THE PERIOD JANUARY 18 TO SEPTEMBER 20, 1954. IT WAS DISALLOWED FOR THE REASON THAT IT WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY COMPETENT TRAVEL ORDERS DIRECTING THE PERFORMANCE OF TRAVEL AND TEMPORARY DUTY FOR WHICH PER DIEM COULD BE PAID.

IN THAT CONNECTION YOU REFER TO A SERIES OF MOVEMENT ORDERS ORDERING THE DEPLOYMENT OF PATROL SQUADRON 47 PURSUANT TO THE VP ROTATION PLAN FOR 1954 WHICH YOU ENCLOSED WITH YOUR LETTER. IT APPEARS TO BE YOUR CONTENTION THAT SUCH PAPERS CONSTITUTE COMPETENT TRAVEL ORDERS TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM.

SECTION 303/A) OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949, 63 STAT. 813, AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF TRAVEL ALLOWANCES FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED UNDER COMPETENT ORDERS. COMPETENT ORDERS FOR PER DIEM PURPOSES ARE DEFINED IN PARAGRAPHS 3000-3003, JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, WHICH PROVIDE THAT WRITTEN ORDERS ISSUED BY COMPETENT AUTHORITY ARE REQUIRED FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES OF TRAVEL, THAT ADVANCE VERBAL ORDERS SUBSEQUENTLY CONFIRMED IN WRITING OR APPROVED BY COMPETENT AUTHORITY WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR WRITTEN ORDERS, AND THAT TRAVEL ORDERS ISSUED UNDER UNUSUAL CONDITIONS WHICH ARE NOT ORIGINATED BY COMPETENT AUTHORITY, MUST BE APPROVED BY COMPETENT AUTHORITY TO ALLOW REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL EXPENSES IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDERS. IF COMPETENT ORDERS ARE NOT ISSUED AS REQUIRED THEREIN, THERE IS NO BASIS FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE EXPENSES OF TRAVEL. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT NO SUCH ORDERS WERE ISSUED TO YOU. THE "ORDERS" YOU SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF YOUR CLAIM ARE NOT TRAVEL ORDERS AND DO NOT DIRECT TEMPORARY DUTY AT ANY POINT SO AS TO GIVE RISE TO A RIGHT TO PER DIEM UNDER THE REGULATION. WHERE COMPETENT ORDERS WERE NOT ISSUED BECAUSE OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE BELIEF THAT PER DIEM WAS NOT PAYABLE AND THE EXPENSES OF TRAVEL WERE OF A MINOR NATURE--- BOTH GOVERNMENT QUARTERS AND MESSING FACILITIES BEING AVAILABLE--- THE QUESTION OF WHETHER PROPER CONFIRMATORY ORDERS WILL BE ISSUED IS A MATTER FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION. SECNAV INSTRUCTION 7220.19 DATED JUNE 4, 1956, DEALS WITH THE PROBLEM OF PAYMENT OF PER DIEM WHERE WRITTEN ORDERS WERE NOT ISSUED BECAUSE OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE CONCLUSION THAT PER DIEM WAS NOT PAYABLE. PARAGRAPH 6D OF THESE INSTRUCTIONS IS AS FOLLOWS:

"MEMBERS WHO HAVE COMPLETED A PERIOD OF TEMPORARY ADDITIONAL DUTY FOR WHICH THE REQUIRED WRITTEN ORDERS WERE NOT ISSUED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THIS INSTRUCTION WILL NOT BE ISSUED CONFIRMING ORDERS.'

IN VIEW OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION CONCERNING PAYMENT OF PER DIEM IN CASES SUCH AS YOURS, AS SET OUT IN THE QUOTED INSTRUCTION, THERE IS NO LEGAL BASIS UPON WHICH YOUR CLAIM MAY BE ALLOWED. ACCORDINGLY, THE SETTLEMENT OF NOVEMBER 1, 1956, IS SUSTAINED.