B-99218, DECEMBER 4, 1950, 30 COMP. GEN. 224

B-99218, DECEMBER 4, 1950, 30 COMP. GEN. 224

TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS - ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION REQUIREMENT IN VIEW OF THE REQUIREMENT IN SECTION 1 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES ACT OF AUGUST 2, 1946, THAT REIMBURSEMENT OF THE EXPENSES OF TRANSPORTATION OF AN EMPLOYEE'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY UPON A CHANGE OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION BE AUTHORIZED IN THE ORDER DIRECTING THE EMPLOYEE'S TRAVEL, AN EMPLOYEE WHO WAS TRANSFERRED BETWEEN OFFICIAL DUTY STATIONS OUTSIDE THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES, UNDER ORDERS WHICH DID NOT AUTHORIZE THE TRANSPORTATION OF HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY DUE TO LACK OF AVAILABLE HOUSING FOR DEPENDENTS, MAY NOT BE REIMBURSED FOR THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY HIS WIFE IN TRAVELING TO HIS NEW STATION WITHOUT ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION. COMP. GEN. 526, DISTINGUISHED.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL WARREN TO IRA H. OURS, DECEMBER 4, 1950:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 10, 1950, AND ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT OF JUNE 6, 1950, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL EXPENSES OF YOUR DEPENDENT WIFE FROM NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, TO TO ANCHORAGE, ALASKA, INCIDENT TO YOUR SERVICE AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, THE DISALLOWANCE BEING FOR THE REASON THAT THE TRAVEL OF YOUR DEPENDENT WAS NOT AUTHORIZED OR APPROVED IN WRITING. IN YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW YOU ENCLOSE A CLIPPING FROM THE ARMY TIMES REFERRING TO A RECENT DECISION BY THIS OFFICE, AND YOU STATE THAT YOUR CASE FALLS IN THE SAME CATEGORY.

THE DECISION REFERRED TO IN THE CLIPPING HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS DECISION B-95377, JUNE 28, 1950, PUBLISHED IN 29 COMP. GEN. 526, IN WHICH IT WAS HELD, QUOTING FROM THE SYLLABUS:

UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 2, 1946, PERMITTING ALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES OF TRANSPORTATION OF THE IMMEDIATE FAMILIES OF NEW APPOINTEES FROM PLACES OF ACTUAL RESIDENCE AT TIME OF APPOINTMENT TO PLACES OF EMPLOYMENT OUTSIDE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES, A PERSON WHO, WHILE OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES, IS EMPLOYED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR DUTY IN THE COUNTRY WHERE APPOINTED WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT HIS DEPENDENTS WOULD BE TRANSPORTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE TO HIS POST OF DUTY FROM HIS LEGAL RESIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES MAY BE REIMBURSED SUCH EXPENSES, EVEN THOUGH THE TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED WITHOUT PRIOR ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORIZATION.

THE ABOVE DECISION WAS RENDERED WITH RESPECT TO AN EMPLOYEE GIVEN AN ORIGINAL APPOINTMENT IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY, OTHERWISE COMING WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 7 OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 2, 1946, 60 STAT. 808, AND WHICH APPOINTMENT WAS MADE WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT HIS DEPENDENTS WOULD BE TRANSPORTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE. YOUR CASE DOES NOT INVOLVE AN ORIGINAL APPOINTMENT, BUT A TRANSFER OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION FROM HONOLULU TO ALASKA, AND COMES UNDER SECTION 1 OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 2, 1946, 60 STAT. 806. FURTHERMORE, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF RECORD HERE OF ANY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOUR DEPENDENT WOULD BE TRANSPORTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE. SECTION 1 OF SAID ACT OF AUGUST 2, 1946, IN PERTINENT PART, PROVIDES:

THAT (A) UNDER SUCH REGULATIONS AS THE PRESIDENT MAY PRESCRIBE, ANY CIVILIAN OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE OF THE GOVERNMENT WHO, IN THE INTEREST OF THE GOVERNMENT, IS TRANSFERRED FROM ONE OFFICIAL STATION TO ANOTHER, INCLUDING TRANSFER FROM ONE DEPARTMENT TO ANOTHER, FOR PERMANENT DUTY, SHALL, EXCEPT BY OTHERWISE PROVIDED HEREIN, WHEN AUTHORIZED IN THE ORDER DIRECTING THE TRAVEL, BY SUCH SUBORDINATE OFFICIAL OR OFFICIALS OF THE DEPARTMENT CONCERNED AS THE HEAD THEREOF MAY DESIGNATE FOR THE PURPOSE, BE ALLOWED AND PAID FROM GOVERNMENT FUNDS THE EXPENSES OF TRAVEL OF HIMSELF AND THE EXPENSES OF TRANSPORTATION OF HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY (OR A COMMUTATION THEREOF IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT OF FEBRUARY 14, 1931) AND THE EXPENSES OF TRANSPORTATION, PACKING, CRATING, TEMPORARY STORAGE, DRAYAGE, AND UNPACKING OF HIS HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND PERSONAL EFFECTS * * *. (ITALICS SUPPLIED.)

THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE HAS ADVISED THIS OFFICE THAT NOT ONLY WAS THE TRANSPORTATION OF YOUR WIFE NOT AUTHORIZED IN THE ORDER DIRECTING YOUR TRANSFER BUT, ALSO, THAT YOU WERE INFORMED YOUR DEPENDENT COULD NOT ACCOMPANY YOU DUE TO THE LACK OF AVAILABLE HOUSING FOR DEPENDENTS IN ALASKA. YOU FILED NO APPLICATION FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF YOUR DEPENDENT BUT PAID THEREFOR WITHOUT ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION. BY SECOND ENDORSEMENT OF FEBRUARY 28, 1950, FROM HEADQUARTERS, 57TH FIGHTER INTERCEPTOR WING, FORT RICHARDSON, ALASKA, YOUR CLAIM WAS ADMINISTRATIVELY DISAPPROVED.

THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM WAS, THEREFORE, PROPER AND UPON REVIEW MUST BE, AND IS, SUSTAINED.