B-150710, FEB. 14, 1963

B-150710, FEB. 14, 1963

TO CAPTAIN RUSSEL C. MILLS, USAR:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 7, 1963, IN EFFECT REQUESTING REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT DATED DECEMBER 17, 1962, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR YOUR DEPENDENTS' TRAVEL FROM FORT RILEY, KANSAS, TO STEVENS POINT, WISCONSIN, DURING THE PERIOD MARCH 10 TO 11, 1962.

BY MOVEMENT ORDER NO. 3, HEADQUARTERS, FORT RILEY, FORT RILEY, KANSAS, DATED MARCH 8, 1962, THE 410TH SIGNAL COMPANY OF WHICH YOU WERE A MEMBER WAS ORDERED ON TEMPORARY CHANGE OF STATION FROM FORT RILEY TO REPORT AT CAMP MCCOY, WISCONSIN, MARCH 17, 1962, 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. BY AN AMENDING ORDER DATED MAY 21, 1962, THE PERIOD OF TEMPORARY DUTY WAS EXTENDED FROM APPROXIMATELY 75 DAYS TO APPROXIMATELY 145 DAYS. BY ORDERS DATED JULY 18, 1962, YOUR UNIT, AS PART OF THE 410TH SIGNAL COMPANY, WAS ORDERED ON PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION TO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT AUGUST 1, 1962, FROM CAMP MCCOY TO ITS HOME STATION AT STEVENS POINT, WISCONSIN.

THE VOUCHER EVIDENCING YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR DEPENDENTS' TRAVEL SHOWS THAT YOUR DEPENDENTS LEFT FORT RILEY, KANSAS, MARCH 10, 1962, AND ARRIVED AT YOUR HOME IN STEVENS POINT, WISCONSIN, MARCH 11, 1962. THE CLAIM WAS TRANSMITTED HERE FOR SETTLEMENT AS A DOUBTFUL CLAIM FOR THE REASON THAT YOU WERE ORDERED ON TEMPORARY DUTY TO CAMP MCCOY AND THE TRAVEL OF YOUR DEPENDENTS WAS PERFORMED PRIOR TO RECEIPT OF OFFICIAL NOTICE OF IMPENDING RELEASE BY D.A. MESSAGE 599418 DATED APRIL 27, 1962. YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED DECEMBER 17, 1962, BY OUR OFFICE FOR THE REASONS THERE STATED.

IN YOUR LETTER YOU STATE THAT BEFORE THE TEMPORARY DUTY ORDERS OF MARCH 8, 1962, WERE ISSUED YOU WERE TOLD THAT THE TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT OF YOUR COMPANY AT CAMP MCCOY WOULD BE EXTENDED AS SOON AS APPROVAL COULD BE OBTAINED AND THEREFORE, AS THE COMPANY COMMANDER, YOU ARRANGED FOR ALL THE COMPANY EQUIPMENT TO BE MOVED TO CAMP MCCOY, SO THAT THERE WOULD BE NO NECESSITY TO RETURN TO FORT RILEY UPON ORDERS FOR SEPARATION. ALSO YOU SAY THAT THE COMPANY'S HOME STATION IS IN CENTRAL WISCONSIN "AND WHEN IT MOVED BACK TO ITS HOME STATE WE MOST CERTAINLY WEREN-T GOING TO LEAVE OUR FAMILIES IN KANSAS. AT THE END OF THE ORIGINAL TDY ORDER THE UNIT WOULD ONLY HAVE HAD THREE AND ONE HALF MONTHS LEFT TO SERVE SO IT IS NATURAL THAT THESE MEN WOULD RATHER HAVE THEIR FAMILIES AT THEIR OWN HOMES INSTEAD OF IN KANSAS AWAY FROM THEIR FAMILIES AND RELATIVES.' FINALLY, YOU STATE THAT YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS WERE MOVED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE TO YOUR HOME BEFORE THE UNIT TRAVELED TO CAMP MCCOY AND IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO PAY FOR MOVEMENT OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS AND NOT FOR DEPENDENTS' TRAVEL.

PARAGRAPH 7000-9 OF/THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO THE PERTINENT STATUTE, 37 U.S.C. 406, PROVIDES THAT TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS NOT AUTHORIZED WHERE THE DEPENDENTS DEPART THE OLD STATION PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ORDERS DIRECTING A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION UNLESS THE VOUCHER IS 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 REGULATION CONTEMPLATES THAT TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS NOT AUTHORIZED UNTIL THE MEMBER HAS DEFINITE KNOWLEDGE OF AN IMPENDING PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION. MERE GENERAL INFORMATION OF AN IMPENDING CHANGE, INCLUDING RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY, IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE REGULATION. SEE 34 COMP. GEN. 241. PARAGRAPH 8015-1 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS PROVIDES SIMILARLY, THAT TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS NOT AUTHORIZED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ORDERS EXCEPT IN CASES OF EMERGENCY, EXIGENCY OF THE SERVICE, OR WHEN REQUIRED BY SERVICE NECESSITY AS DETERMINED BY THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY OF THE SERVICE CONCERNED.

THE TEMPORARY DUTY ORDERS OF MARCH 8, 1962, PROVIDED FOR A TEMPORARY ASSIGNMENT OF RELATIVELY SHORT DURATION, UPON THE COMPLETION OF WHICH YOUR COMPANY WAS DIRECTED TO RETURN TO ITS PROPER STATION. ALSO THE ORDERS STATED THAT TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS AND SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS WERE NOT AUTHORIZED. ON THE BASIS OF THESE ORDERS, THERE WAS NO AUTHORITY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE. WHILE ON MAY 21, 1962, THESE ORDERS WERE AMENDED TO EXTEND THE TEMPORARY DUTY TO APPROXIMATELY 145 DAYS, SUCH EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY DUTY LONG AFTER THE TRAVEL OF YOUR DEPENDENTS DOES NOT AFFORD A BASIS FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM. ALSO, IT APPEARS THAT IT WAS NOT UNTIL APRIL 27, 1962, THAT YOUR COMPANY RECEIVED OFFICIAL NOTICE OF IMPENDING EARLY RELEASE.

ALTHOUGH YOU STATE YOU WERE TOLD WHILE AT FORT RILEY THAT THE TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT UNDER THE ORDERS OF MARCH 8, 1962, WOULD BE EXTENDED AS SOON AS APPROVAL COULD BE OBTAINED, THIS GENERAL INFORMATION AS TO THE POSSIBLE EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY DUTY, WHICH REQUIRED ACTION BY SUPERIOR AUTHORITY AS A CONDITION PRECEDENT TO ITS PROMULGATION AS ORDERS, IS NOT CONSIDERED TO BE DEFINITE KNOWLEDGE OF AN IMPENDING CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION AND MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED AS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE REGULATIONS. FURTHERMORE, THE VOUCHER IS NOT SUPPORTED BY A CERTIFICATE AS PRESCRIBED BY PARAGRAPH 7000-9 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, AND IT WOULD SEEM FROM THE RECORD BEFORE US THAT THERE IS NO PROPER BASIS FOR ISSUING SUCH A CERTIFICATE. ON THE BASIS OF YOUR OWN STATEMENTS IT APPEARS THAT THE MOVEMENT OF YOUR DEPENDENTS TO YOUR HOME AT THE TIME OF YOUR ASSIGNMENT TO TEMPORARY DUTY AT CAMP MCCOY WAS NOT BECAUSE OF ANY KNOWLEDGE THAT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS WERE TO BE ISSUED. RATHER, THEIR TRAVEL TO YOUR HOME IN WISCONSIN WAS FOR THE PERSONAL REASON THAT YOU DESIRED TO HAVE THEM AT HOME WHILE YOU WERE ASSIGNED TO TEMPORARY DUTY IN THAT STATE RATHER THAN TO LEAVE THEM AT YOUR PERMANENT STATION IN KANSAS. THE REGULATIONS DO NOT AUTHORIZE REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES.

THE FACT THAT THE GOVERNMENT MAY HAVE IMPROPERLY TRANSPORTED YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS TO YOUR HOME INCIDENT TO THE ORDERS OF MARCH 8, 1962, DOES NOT FURNISH ANY BASIS FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TRAVEL OF YOUR DEPENDENTS. ACCORDINGLY, THE SETTLEMENT OF DECEMBER 17, 1962, IS SUSTAINED.