B-166161, JUN. 20, 1969

B-166161, JUN. 20, 1969

TO MASTER SERGEANT ALBERT ALBERDA, RET.:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF FEBRUARY 19, MARCH 27 AND MAY 22, 1969, CONCERNING YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST OF MOVING YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS FROM PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA, TO SONOMA, CALIFORNIA, DURING THE FIRST WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 1967, PRIOR TO ORDERS FOR YOUR RETIREMENT FROM THE AIR FORCE.

ON JULY 12, 1967, WHILE STATIONED AT HAMILTON AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA, AND LIVING IN PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA, YOU SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION FOR RETIREMENT EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 29, 1968. YOU WERE RETIRED EFFECTIVE MARCH 1, 1968, BY ORDERS DATED NOVEMBER 15, 1967. IN ANTICIPATION OF RETIREMENT ORDERS AND TO AVOID MOVING YOUR FAMILY DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR YOU SOLD YOUR HOME IN PETALUMA, PURCHASED A HOME IN SONOMA AND HAULED YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS IN A TRAILER AT PERSONAL EXPENSE.

YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT WAS DENIED BY THE AIR FORCE AND WAS DISALLOWED BY THE SETTLEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1968, FOR THE REASON THAT SHIPMENT PRIOR TO ORDERS HAD NOT BEEN AUTHORIZED BY THE AIR FORCE. REQUESTING REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT YOU CONTENDED THAT APPROVAL OF SHIPMENT PRIOR TO ORDERS WAS GIVEN BY THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OFFICER AT HAMILTON AIR FORCE BASE, BY LETTER OF NOVEMBER 21, 1967.

BY DECISION OF FEBRUARY 17, 1969, B-166161, YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS SPECIFICALLY PROVIDE THAT TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS NOT AUTHORIZED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ORDERS EXCEPT IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, EXIGENCY OF THE SERVICE, OR WHEN REQUIRED BY SERVICE NECESSITY AS DETERMINED BY THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY OF THE SERVICE CONCERNED. YOU WERE ALSO ADVISED THAT THE RECORD SHOWS THAT PRIOR TO HAULING YOUR EFFECTS TO SONOMA YOU REQUESTED THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OFFICE AT HAMILTON AIR FORCE BASE TO MOVE YOUR EFFECTS TO SONOMA ON OR BEFORE SEPTEMBER 1, 1967, AND THAT YOU WERE ADVISED SHIPMENT COULD NOT BE MADE PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF YOUR RETIREMENT ORDERS.

YOU FURTHER WERE ADVISED THAT THE LETTER OF NOVEMBER 21, 1967, FROM THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OFFICER AT HAMILTON AIR FORCE BASE WAS WRITTEN TO THE ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE OFFICER AT THE SAME BASE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADVISING THAT OFFICER WHAT IT WOULD HAVE COST THE GOVERNMENT TO SHIP YOUR EFFECTS HAD SHIPMENT BEEN AUTHORIZED AND MADE BY THE GOVERNMENT. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT SINCE YOU RECEIVED YOUR RETIREMENT ORDERS A DAY EARLIER AND HAD SHIPPED YOUR EFFECTS IN SEPTEMBER, THAT LETTER COULD NOT SERVE AS AN AUTHORIZATION TO SHIP YOUR EFFECTS PRIOR TO ORDERS.

ALSO, SINCE YOU HAD REPEATEDLY REFERRED TO YOUR RESIDENCE IN SONOMA AS YOUR RETIREMENT HOME AND SINCE IT WAS APPARENT THAT YOU COMPLETED TRAVEL THERE, IT WAS ASSUMED YOU HAD BEEN PAID A TRAVEL ALLOWANCE TO THAT CITY AS YOUR HOME OF SELECTION UPON RETIREMENT.

IN YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 19, 1969, YOU SAID YOU DEFINITELY WERE AUTHORIZED TO SHIP YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS PRIOR TO ORDERS AND THAT THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OFFICER'S LETTER OF NOVEMBER 21, 1967, WAS FURNISHED SO YOU COULD BE REIMBURSED FOR THE MOVE. ALSO, YOU SAID YOU HAD NOT BEEN PAID MILEAGE FOR YOUR TRAVEL UPON RETIREMENT. BY LETTER OF MARCH 27, 1969, YOU FURNISHED A COPY OF A SEPARATION PAY EXPLANATION FORM WHICH DID NOT LIST A MILEAGE PAYMENT TO YOU FOR TRAVEL UPON RETIREMENT.

IN VIEW OF THE CONTENTIONS IN YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 19, 1969, WE REQUESTED THE AIR FORCE TO FURNISH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. BY LETTER OF APRIL 8, 1969, THE AIR FORCE ADVISED US AS FOLLOWS:

"HAMILTON AIR FORCE BASE WAS CONTACTED. HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE LAPSE OF TIME AND LACK OF WRITTEN RECORDS, THEY WERE UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE COUNSELING RECEIVED BY SGT ALBERDA REGARDING THE MOVEMENT OF HIS HOUSEHOLD GOODS. THE STATEMENT ISSUED BY THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OFFICER REGARDING THE COST TO THE GOVERNMENT FOR SHIPMENT OF LIKE AMOUNT OF GOODS, IS ISSUED UPON REQUEST SOLELY TO SUPPORT A CLAIM.

"HAMILTON AFB CANNOT FIND A RECORD OF MILEAGE PAYMENT FOR MEMBER OR DEPENDENTS TO A HOME OF SELECTION UPON RETIREMENT. THE REASON NO PAYMENT WAS MADE WAS BECAUSE CLAIM WAS NOT SUBMITTED.'

THUS, IT IS SHOWN THAT THE AIR FORCE HAS NO RECORD THAT YOU WERE AUTHORIZED TO MOVE YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS PRIOR TO RECEIPT OF YOUR RETIREMENT ORDERS, AND THAT THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT OFFICER'S LETTER OF NOVEMBER 21, 1967, WAS NOT ISSUED TO SERVE AS AUTHORITY FOR THE MOVEMENT OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS. ALSO, IT IS SHOWN THAT YOU WERE NOT PAID FOR TRAVEL FOR YOURSELF OR YOUR DEPENDENTS UPON RETIREMENT BECAUSE YOU DID NOT FILE A CLAIM.

YOU SAY THAT YOU PRESENTLY LIVE NEARER TO HAMILTON AIR FORCE BASE THAN WHEN LIVING AT PETALUMA, AND THAT YOU MOVED YOUR DEPENDENTS AND CHANGED YOUR RESIDENCE WHILE YOU WERE ON ACTIVE DUTY AT THAT BASE. SINCE YOUR DEPENDENTS TRAVELED PRIOR TO YOUR RETIREMENT ORDERS AND NO CERTIFICATE AS REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH M7003-4 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS HAS BEEN FURNISHED THERE WOULD BE NO BASIS FOR PAYMENT OF A CLAIM FOR THEIR TRAVEL. HOWEVER, SINCE YOU WERE ENTITLED TO MILEAGE FOR YOUR OWN TRAVEL FROM HAMILTON AIR FORCE BASE TO SONOMA UPON RETIREMENT IF COMPLETED WITHIN ONE YEAR AND SINCE YOU COMPLETED SUCH TRAVEL YOU WILL BE CONSIDERED AS ENTITLED TO A TRAVEL ALLOWANCE AT THE RATE OF 6 CENTS PER MILE FOR THE SHORT DISTANCE INVOLVED. WE WILL ISSUE A SETTLEMENT IN YOUR FAVOR FOR THIS IF YOU SO DESIRE.

IN YOUR LETTER OF MAY 22, 1969, YOU REFER TO A PHONE CALL MADE BY YOUR WIFE TO THIS OFFICE ON FEBRUARY 7, 1969, IN WHICH SHE WAS ADVISED THAT A FURTHER MOVE FROM SONOMA, CALIFORNIA, TO FAIRBANKS, ALASKA, WAS NOT AUTHORIZED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE. YOU BELIEVE SUCH ADVICE WAS ERRONEOUS OR THAT THE DECISION OF FEBRUARY 17, 1969, WAS ERRONEOUS. ALSO, YOU ADMIT YOU SHIPPED PRIOR TO ORDERS BUT EXPRESS THE BELIEF THAT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS MOVEMENT OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS WAS AUTHORIZED BECAUSE YOU HAD APPLIED FOR RETIREMENT AND EXPECTED RETIREMENT ORDERS TO BE ISSUED.

AS EXPLAINED TO YOU IN THE DECISION OF FEBRUARY 17, 1969, A MEMBER UPON RETIREMENT MAY SELECT HIS HOME AND IF HE TRAVELS THERETO WITHIN ONE YEAR AFTER HIS RETIREMENT HE MAY BE PAID A TRAVEL ALLOWANCE, AND MAY ALSO MOVE HIS DEPENDENTS AND HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE TO THE SAME PLACE WITHIN ONE YEAR. SINCE YOU HAD SELECTED SONOMA AS YOUR HOME UPON RETIREMENT AND HAD MOVED YOUR DEPENDENTS AND HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS THERETO, AND PRESENTED CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST OF MOVING THE HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS ON THE BASIS THAT IT WAS YOUR SELECTED HOME, YOU WERE NOT ENTITLED TO A FURTHER MOVE AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE ON THE BASIS OF A FURTHER CONTRARY REPRESENTATION THAT THE PLACE SELECTED AS YOUR HOME UPON RETIREMENT WAS AT ANOTHER PLACE. THIS IS TRUE EVEN THOUGH BY REASON OF FAILING TO COMPLY WITH STATUTORY REGULATIONS, YOU WERE UNABLE TO OBTAIN REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE COMPLETED MOVE TO YOUR SELECTED HOME. THEREFORE, YOU WERE NOT ERRONEOUSLY ADVISED BY THIS OFFICE, EITHER ORALLY OR BY DECISION.

THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS DO NOT AUTHORIZE TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS PRIOR TO CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS EXCEPT WHEN SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE SERVICE CONCERNED UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES SHOWN ABOVE. THIS WAS NOT DONE IN YOUR CASE AND THE FACTS DO NOT REFLECT ANY EMERGENCY, EXIGENCY OF THE SERVICE, OR SERVICE NECESSITY WHICH WOULD HAVE WARRANTED SUCH AUTHORIZATION. ON THE CONTRARY, IT IS CLEAR FROM YOUR LETTERS THAT THE MOVE PRIOR TO ORDERS IN YOUR CASE WAS FOR PERSONAL REASONS IN ANTICIPATION OF RETIREMENT ORDERS. UNDER THE LAW AND REGULATIONS THE MERE EXPECTATION THAT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS, INCLUDING ORDERS FOR RETIREMENT, WILL BE ISSUED DOES NOT AFFORD A BASIS FOR SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS PRIOR TO ORDERS.

SINCE WE FIND NO BASIS FOR PAYMENT OF YOUR CLAIM FOR HAULING YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS THE DECISION OF FEBRUARY 17, 1969, IS AFFIRMED.