B-150201, APR. 2, 1963

B-150201, APR. 2, 1963

TO FIRST LIEUTENANT LEO T. KUBISIAK, USAR:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 28, 1963, IN EFFECT REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF DECEMBER 17, 1962, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE FOR YOUR DEPENDENT'S (WIFE) TRAVEL FROM MANHATTAN, KANSAS, TO WISCONSIN RAPIDS, WISCONSIN, DURING THE PERIOD JANUARY 15, 1962, TO APRIL 1, 1962.

BY LETTER ORDER 1-16, HEADQUARTERS, FORT RILEY, FORT RILEY, KANSAS, DATED JANUARY 5, 1962, YOU WERE ORDERED FROM FORT RILEY TO THE SOUTHEASTERN SIGNAL SCHOOL, FORT GORDON, GEORGIA, FOR TEMPORARY DUTY TO ATTEND A COURSE OF INSTRUCTION FOR APPROXIMATELY 65 DAYS, UPON COMPLETION OF WHICH YOU WERE TO RETURN TO YOUR DUTY STATION. BY MOVEMENT ORDER NO. 3, DATED MARCH 8, 1962, YOU WERE DIRECTED TO JOIN YOUR UNIT WHICH WAS ORDERED FROM FORT RILEY, KANSAS, TO CAMP MCCOY, WISCONSIN, FOR TEMPORARY DUTY OF APPROXIMATELY 75 DAYS AND, UPON COMPLETION OF THE MISSION, TO RETURN TO ITS PROPER STATION, FORT RILEY. THE ORDERS STATED THAT TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS AND SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS WERE NOT AUTHORIZED. AMENDATORY ORDERS DATED MAY 21, 1962, THE PERIOD OF TEMPORARY DUTY WAS EXTENDED TO APPROXIMATELY 145 DAYS. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT YOUR ORGANIZATION RECEIVED OFFICIAL NOTICE OF IMPENDING RELEASE ON APRIL 27, 1962, BY DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY MESSAGE 599418, AND BY ORDERS DATED JULY 18, 1962, YOUR UNIT, AS PART OF THE 410TH SIGNAL COMPANY, WAS ORDERED TO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT AUGUST 1, 1962, TO ITS HOME STATION IN WISCONSIN RAPIDS, WISCONSIN.

THE VOUCHER EVIDENCING YOUR CLAIM SHOWS THAT YOUR WIFE LEFT MANHATTAN, KANSAS, JANUARY 15, 1962, AND ARRIVED AT NORTH AUGUSTA, SOUTH CAROLINA, JANUARY 20, 1962. SHE SUBSEQUENTLY LEFT NORTH AUGUSTA MARCH 22, 1962, AND ARRIVED AT WISCONSIN RAPIDS, WISCONSIN ON APRIL 1, 1962. YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED BY SETTLEMENT OF DECEMBER 17, 1962, FOR THE REASON THAT THE REGULATIONS DO NOT PROVIDE FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS WHEN A MEMBER IS ORDERED TO TEMPORARY DUTY. ALSO, YOUR CLAIM WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY A CERTIFICATE AS REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH 7000-9 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS AND PRESENTED NO BASIS TO CONCLUDE THAT YOU HAD DEFINITE KNOWLEDGE AT THE TIME YOUR DEPENDENT TRAVELED THAT YOU WOULD BE AT CAMP MCCOY FOR THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE PERIOD FOR WHICH YOU WERE CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY OR THAT ORDERS WOULD BE ISSUED FOR YOUR EARLY RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY.

IN YOUR LETTER YOU STATE THAT THE REGULATIONS PROVIDE THAT UPON PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS YOUR DEPENDENTS WILL BE PAID FOR TRAVEL AND YOU SEEM TO BE OF THE VIEW THAT IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHEN THE TRAVEL IS PERFORMED OR WHETHER YOU HAD DEFINITE KNOWLEDGE AT THE TIME OF THE TRAVEL THAT PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS WERE TO BE ISSUED. YOU ALSO INQUIRE WHETHER YOU WOULD BE ENTITLED TO PAYMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES IF YOU OBTAINED A CERTIFICATE AS PROVIDED IN THE REGULATIONS.

PARAGRAPH 7000-9 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO THE PERTINENT STATUTE, 37 U.S.C. 406, PROVIDES THAT MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES ARE ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE UPON A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION EXCEPT WHERE DEPENDENTS DEPART THE OLD STATION PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ORDERS DIRECTING A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION AND THE VOUCHER IS NOT SUPPORTED BY A CERTIFICATE OF THE COMMANDING OFFICER, OR HIS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE, OF THE HEADQUARTERS ISSUING THE ORDERS THAT THE MEMBER WAS ADVISED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS THAT SUCH ORDERS WOULD BE ISSUED. IT SEEMS CLEAR THAT THE REGULATIONS CONTEMPLATE THAT TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS NOT AUTHORIZED UNTIL THE MEMBER HAS DEFINITE KNOWLEDGE OF AN IMPENDING PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION. THEREFORE, IT HAS BEEN THE RULE THAT THE REGULATION WITH RESPECT TO A CERTIFICATE IS APPLICABLE ONLY WHERE DEPARTURE OF THE DEPENDENTS IS DURING THE COMPARATIVELY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME WHICH MAY ELAPSE BETWEEN THE TIME OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION TO ORDER A MEMBER TO MAKE A CHANGE OF STATION AND THE DATE ON WHICH ORDERS DIRECTING SUCH CHANGE ACTUALLY ARE ISSUED. MERE GENERAL INFORMATION OF AN IMPENDING CHANGE, INCLUDING RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY, IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE REGULATION. 34 COMP. GEN. 241.

ON THE BASIS OF YOUR STATEMENT, IT APPEARS THAT THE TRAVEL OF YOUR WIFE TO YOUR HOME AT THE TIME OF YOUR ASSIGNMENT TO CAMP MCCOY, WISCONSIN, WAS NOT PERFORMED BECAUSE YOU HAD DEFINITE KNOWLEDGE THAT PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS WOULD SOON BE ISSUED. RATHER, YOU SAY THAT SHE TRAVELED TO YOUR HOME IN WISCONSIN RAPIDS BECAUSE YOU WERE STATIONED CLOSE TO YOUR HOME AND YOUR WIFE WANTED TO RETURN TO YOUR HOME AND REMAIN THERE REGARDLESS OF WHEN YOU WOULD RECEIVE PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS AUTHORIZING SUCH TRAVEL. THE REGULATIONS DO NOT AUTHORIZE TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE FOR ADVANCE TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES.

WITH RESPECT TO YOUR INQUIRY AS TO WHETHER YOU WOULD BE ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE IF YOU OBTAINED THE CERTIFICATE PRESCRIBED BY PARAGRAPH 7000-9, IT IS NOTED THAT YOUR WIFE LEFT YOUR DUTY STATION AT FORT RILEY ON JANUARY 15, 1962, AND SUBSEQUENTLY TRAVELED TO HER HOME FROM NORTH AUGUSTA, SOUTH CAROLINA, ARRIVING APRIL 1, 1962. SINCE HER TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED BEFORE YOU RECEIVED OFFICIAL NOTICE OF YOUR IMPENDING RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY ON APRIL 27, 1962, IT WOULD SEEM THAT A CERTIFICATE COULD NOT BE PROPERLY ISSUED IN YOUR CASE.

ACCORDINGLY, THE SETTLEMENT OF DECEMBER 17, 1962, WAS PROPER AND IS SUSTAINED.