Skip to main content

B-175719, OCT 5, 1972

B-175719 Oct 05, 1972
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

THERE IS NO BASIS IN LAW WHICH WOULD AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF LOST WAGES CAUSED BY PREMATURE LEAVING OF EMPLOYMENT TO ENLIST IN THE ARMED SERVICES. PAYMENT FOR MOVEMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS IS ONLY AUTHORIZED IN THE CASE OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED SERVICES WHO MOVED THEIR GOODS UNDER COMPETENT ORDERS. 37 U.S.C. 406D. SUCH REIMBURSEMENT MUST BE FOR THE COST OF TRAVEL TO THE PLACE WHERE THE ENLISTEE WAS INSTRUCTED TO REPORT AND MAY NOT EXCEED ACTUAL FARE PAID. MILLER: REFERENCE IS MADE TO A LETTER RECEIVED FROM MR. ALSO WE HAVE RECEIVED HIS LETTER DATED AUGUST 16. DAVIS WAS ADVISED THAT YOUR CLAIM MAY NOT BE PAID. YOU WERE FURNISHED A COPY OF THAT LETTER. IT APPEARS THAT IN 1965 YOU WERE RELEASED FROM ACTIVE DUTY IN THE U.S.

View Decision

B-175719, OCT 5, 1972

ARMED SERVICES - REJECTED ATTEMPTED ENLISTEES - EXPENSES DECISION ALLOWING IN PART THE CLAIM OF ROBERT J. MILLER FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCIDENT TO HIS ATTEMPTED ENLISTMENT IN THE U.S. NAVY. THERE IS NO BASIS IN LAW WHICH WOULD AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF LOST WAGES CAUSED BY PREMATURE LEAVING OF EMPLOYMENT TO ENLIST IN THE ARMED SERVICES. PAYMENT FOR MOVEMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS IS ONLY AUTHORIZED IN THE CASE OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED SERVICES WHO MOVED THEIR GOODS UNDER COMPETENT ORDERS. 37 U.S.C. 406D. JTR, PARAGRAPH M5050 PROVIDES FOR TRAVEL EXPENSES AND PER DIEM FOR TRAVEL INCIDENT TO ATTEMPTED ENLISTMENT, BUT SUCH REIMBURSEMENT MUST BE FOR THE COST OF TRAVEL TO THE PLACE WHERE THE ENLISTEE WAS INSTRUCTED TO REPORT AND MAY NOT EXCEED ACTUAL FARE PAID.

TO MR. ROBERT J. MILLER:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO A LETTER RECEIVED FROM MR. BLANTON DATED MARCH 28, 1972, SUBMITTING ADDITIONAL DATA AND REQUESTING ON YOUR BEHALF FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCIDENT TO YOUR ATTEMPT TO ENLIST IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY. ALSO WE HAVE RECEIVED HIS LETTER DATED AUGUST 16, 1972. BY LETTER OF FEBRUARY 29, 1972, REPRESENTATIVE MENDEL J. DAVIS WAS ADVISED THAT YOUR CLAIM MAY NOT BE PAID. APPARENTLY, YOU WERE FURNISHED A COPY OF THAT LETTER.

IT APPEARS THAT IN 1965 YOU WERE RELEASED FROM ACTIVE DUTY IN THE U.S. NAVY AND TRANSFERRED TO THE U.S. NAVAL RESERVE. ON YOUR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY YOU WERE ISSUED AN ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES REPORT OF TRANSFER OR DISCHARGE, DD FORM 214 WHICH STATED THAT YOU WERE NOT RECOMMENDED FOR REENLISTMENT. YOU SIGNED A STATEMENT ACKNOWLEDGING THAT YOU WERE INFORMED OF SUCH STATEMENT. YOU THEREAFTER HAD A PERIOD OF INACTIVE SERVICE IN THE U.S. NAVAL RESERVE, RECEIVING A DISCHARGE FROM THE U.S. NAVAL RESERVE IN MARCH 1968.

SUBSEQUENTLY YOU RECEIVED AT YOUR RESIDENCE IN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, A BROCHURE CONCERNING RECRUITMENT OF VETERANS IN THE TRAINING AND ADMINISTRATION OF RESERVES (TAR) PROGRAM. THIS BROCHURE HAD BEEN SENT BY THE NAVAL AIR STATION IN ATLANTA TO YOUR HOME ADDRESS OF RECORD, CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA, AND FORWARDED TO YOU IN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI.

YOU THEN ENGAGED IN CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE NAVAL AIR STATION, ATLANTA, CONCERNING YOUR ENLISTING IN THE TAR PROGRAM. IN MARCH 1971 YOUR REQUEST FOR ASSIGNMENT TO THE AIR TAR PROGRAM WAS APPROVED PROVIDED YOU WERE ELIGIBLE FOR REENLISTMENT AND ON APRIL 4, 1971, YOU WERE SO INFORMED. YOU WERE ALSO INSTRUCTED TO REPORT TO THE NEAREST NAVAL AIR RESERVE ACTIVITY TO YOUR RESIDENCE IN ST. LOUIS, WHICH WAS THE NAVAL AIR RESERVE TRAINING UNIT, MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE, TO REENLIST. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE NAVAL AIR STATION, ATLANTA TO WHICH YOU HAD SUBMITTED YOUR APPLICATION FOR REENLISTMENT HAD NOT BEEN INFORMED BY YOU, AND CONSEQUENTLY WAS UNAWARE, OF THE NOTATION IN YOUR DD FORM 214 RECEIVED UPON YOUR TRANSFER FROM THE ACTIVE NAVY TO THE NAVAL RESERVE, STATING YOU WERE NOT RECOMMENDED FOR REENLISTMENT.

NOTWITHSTANDING THE INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN YOU ON APRIL 4, 1971, YOU PRESENTED YOURSELF TO THE NAVAL AIR STATION, ATLANTA, ON APRIL 23, 1971, FOR ENLISTMENT. IT WAS AT THIS TIME THAT THE NOTATION ON YOUR DD FORM 214 OF MAY 1965 WAS DISCOVERED. ACCORDINGLY, YOU WERE INFORMED THAT IN ORDER TO BE REENLISTED IT WAS NECESSARY TO OBTAIN THE APPROVAL OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL. IN MAY 1971 THE BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL ADVISED THE NAVAL AIR STATION, ATLANTA THAT YOU WERE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR REENLISTMENT. YOU WERE ADVISED OF THIS AND THE PRIOR CONTINGENT APPROVAL WAS CANCELLED.

YOU HAVE SUBMITTED A CLAIM AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT FOR EXPENDITURES MADE BY YOU IN ANTICIPATION OF YOUR REENLISTMENT IN THE U.S. NAVY AS FOLLOWS:

AIR FARE ST. LOUIS TO ATLANTA $ 43.00

MOVEMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS FROM

ST. LOUIS TO ANTICIPATED DUTY STATION,

MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE 455.00

LOSS OF EARNINGS DUE TO RESIGNATION FROM

EMPLOYMENT IN ANTICIPATION OF REENLISTMENT 480.00

TOTAL $978.00

WE ARE AWARE OF NO LAW OR REGULATION WHICH WOULD AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF LOST WAGES CAUSED BY PREMATURE LEAVING OF EMPLOYMENT TO ENLIST IN THE SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES. ACCORDINGLY WE FIND NO BASIS FOR THE PAYMENT OF THAT PORTION OF YOUR CLAIM.

REGARDING YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE MOVEMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS TO YOUR ANTICIPATED DUTY STATION, YOU ARE ADVISED THAT PAYMENT FOR MOVEMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS IS AUTHORIZED ONLY IN THE CASE OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES WHO MOVED THEIR GOODS UNDER COMPETENT ORDERS, 37 U.S.C. 406D. UNLESS THERE HAS BEEN AN ACTUAL ENTRY IN OR SEPARATION FROM SERVICE IN THE CASE OF THE MEMBER, THERE IS NO ENTITLEMENT UNDER THE LAW AND REGULATIONS TO TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS. YOU WERE NEITHER A MEMBER OF THE ARMED FORCES NOR WAS THE SHIPMENT MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROPER ORDERS. ACCORDINGLY YOUR CLAIM FOR MOVEMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS CANNOT BE APPROVED.

IN REGARD TO YOUR CLAIM FOR FARE FROM ST. LOUIS TO ATLANTA, YOUR ATTORNEY HAS FURNISHED THIS OFFICE A COPY OF AN INFORMAL MEMORANDUM TO YOU FROM A AOCM ALBERT FREEMAN, EVIDENTLY A MEMBER OF THE NAVAL AIR STATION, ATLANTA, DATED FEBRUARY 24, 1971, WHICH STATED IN PERTINENT PART:

"*** I WILL GET APPROVAL EVEN BEFORE YOU ARE REENLISTED THEN CALL YOU AND MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO HAVE YOU DOWN HERE AT NAS ATLANTA FOR ONE WEEKEND TO TAKE CARE OF THE REENLISTMENT (AS YN 3) AND TO SCHEDULE THE DATE YOU WOULD BE COMING ON ACTIVE DUTY."

IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS LETTER WAS WRITTEN PRIOR TO THE INSTRUCTIONS YOU RECEIVED ON APRIL 4, 1971, TO THE EFFECT THAT YOU SHOULD GO TO THE NEAREST NAVAL AIR RESERVE ACTIVITY (THE TRAINING UNIT IN MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE), TO EFFECT YOUR REENLISTMENT. IN ADDITION, THE MEMORANDUM OF FEBRUARY 24, 1971, DID NOT AUTHORIZE YOUR GOING TO ATLANTA BUT, ON THE CONTRARY, ONLY STATED THAT THE WRITER WOULD MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO HAVE YOU IN ATLANTA.

UNDER 37 U.S.C. 410(A)(5) AND (6) APPLICANTS FOR ENLISTMENT AND REJECTED APPLICANTS ARE ENTITLED TO SUCH TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES AS ARE PROVIDED BY SECTION 404 OF THIS TITLE AND PRESCRIBED BY THE SECRETARIES CONCERNED. IN FURTHERANCE OF THIS STATUTE PARAGRAPH M5050 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS PROVIDES FOR TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES FOR TRAVEL INCIDENT TO ENLISTMENT. THIS REGULATION STATES THAT APPLICANTS WILL BE FURNISHED TRANSPORTATION AND MEAL TICKETS, IF AVAILABLE, FOR TRAVEL FROM THEIR HOMES TO PLACE OF PHYSICAL EXAMINATION OR PLACE OF ACCEPTANCE FOR ENLISTMENT, OR BOTH, INCLUDING RETURN TRAVEL IN THE EVENT THE APPLICANT IS REJECTED. PROVISION IS MADE FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION PURCHASED FROM PERSONAL FUNDS IN THE EVENT TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS AND/OR MEAL TICKETS ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR ISSUANCE FOR THE TRAVEL CONTEMPLATED.

THE RECORD INDICATES THAT YOU WERE TOLD TO REPORT TO THE NEAREST NAVAL AIR RESERVE ACTIVITY TO REENLIST. THIS YOU FAILED TO DO. CONTRARY TO INSTRUCTIONS YOU TRAVELED TO ATLANTA. YOUR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN TO YOU, AND PERFORMING TRAVEL TO A LOCATION NOT AUTHORIZED IS NOT SUCH AUTHORIZED TRAVEL AS WOULD BE REIMBURSABLE UNDER M5050 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. ACCORDINGLY YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL FROM ST. LOUIS TO ATLANTA WAS PROPERLY DENIED.

HOWEVER, IT DOES APPEAR THAT YOU WERE INSTRUCTED TO REPORT TO THE NEAREST FACILITY, RESERVE TRAINING UNIT IN MEMPHIS, TO REENLIST. ACCORDINGLY, SINCE BOTH THE STATUTE AND THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATION PROVIDE FOR THE FURNISHING OF TRAVEL INCIDENT TO ENLISTMENT, IT IS CONCLUDED THAT YOU ARE ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT IN THE AMOUNT THAT IT WOULD HAVE COST FOR TRAVEL FROM ST. LOUIS TO MEMPHIS AS WELL AS RETURN FARE UPON REJECTION OF YOUR ENLISTMENT, NOT TO EXCEED YOUR ACTUAL FARE PAID.

WE HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT THERE WAS A FLIGHT LEAVING ST. LOUIS AT 8:00 A.M., ARRIVING IN MEMPHIS AT 8:48 A.M., ON DELTA AIR LINES. THERE ALSO WAS A FLIGHT LEAVING MEMPHIS AT 5:55 P.M., ARRIVING IN ST. LOUIS AT 6:47 P.M. THE COACH FARE FOR SUCH FLIGHTS WAS $26.00 EACH WAY FOR A TOTAL OF $52.00. HOWEVER SINCE YOU PAID ONLY $43.00 FOR YOUR TRAVEL, REIMBURSEMENT CAN BE MADE NOT TO EXCEED THAT AMOUNT. IN ADDITION YOU ARE ENTITLED TO 3/4 OF A DAY'S PER DIEM.

WE ARE INSTRUCTING OUR CLAIMS DIVISION TO MAKE SETTLEMENT ON YOUR CLAIM AS IF YOU HAD TRAVELED FROM ST. LOUIS TO MEMPHIS AND RETURN BUT NOT TO EXCEED THE AMOUNT ACTUALLY PAID, PLUS PER DIEM AS INDICATED ABOVE.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs