B-155996, FEB. 7, 1966
Highlights
WAS SUSTAINED BY OUR DECISION TO YOU OF FEBRUARY 15. YOU NOW REQUEST THAT WE SPECIFICALLY REVIEW THREE ITEMS OF EXPENSE WHICH PREVIOUSLY WERE DISALLOWED. YOU CONTEND THAT YOUR PLACE OF RESIDENCE FOR SEPARATION PURPOSES WAS TACOMA. WHILE THE INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ADMINISTRATION DETERMINED THAT YOUR PLACE OF RESIDENCE FOR SEPARATION WAS PALATINE. THE DETERMINATION OF YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE WAS BASED ON THE FACT THAT ON MARCH 7. SHOULD HAVE BEEN REGARDED AS YOUR PLACE OF RESIDENCE FOR SEPARATION. WAS NOT IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF YOUR RETURN TRAVEL TO THIS COUNTRY. WAS SUPERSEDED BY ICA MANUAL ORDER NO. 560.2. FOR APPOINTMENT AND SEPARATION "THE EMPLOYEE'S DESIGNATED PLACE OF RESIDENCE OR HOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPOINTMENT AND SEPARATION OR SHIPMENT OF REMAINS IS THE PLACE IN THE UNITED STATES AT WHICH THE EMPLOYEE RESIDED AT THE TIME OF APPOINTMENT OR.
B-155996, FEB. 7, 1966
TO MR. WALTER L. BENDER:
THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 10, 1966, REQUESTING FURTHER REVIEW OF OUR OFFICE SETTLEMENT DATED OCTOBER 1, 1963, WHICH, IN PART, DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF VARIOUS TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES INCURRED BY YOU WHILE EMPLOYED OVERSEAS WITH THE INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ADMINISTRATION (NOW THE AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT). THE SETTLEMENT, REFERRED TO ABOVE, WAS SUSTAINED BY OUR DECISION TO YOU OF FEBRUARY 15, 1965, B-155996. YOU NOW REQUEST THAT WE SPECIFICALLY REVIEW THREE ITEMS OF EXPENSE WHICH PREVIOUSLY WERE DISALLOWED.
THE FIRST ITEM CONCERNS YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST OF TRANSPORTING YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS FROM BOGOTA, COLUMBIA, TO TACOMA, WASHINGTON, INCIDENT TO YOUR RETURN TO THIS COUNTRY FOR SEPARATION IN JULY 1961. YOU CONTEND THAT YOUR PLACE OF RESIDENCE FOR SEPARATION PURPOSES WAS TACOMA, WASHINGTON, WHILE THE INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ADMINISTRATION DETERMINED THAT YOUR PLACE OF RESIDENCE FOR SEPARATION WAS PALATINE, ILLINOIS. THE DETERMINATION OF YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE WAS BASED ON THE FACT THAT ON MARCH 7, 1960, YOU FORMALLY DESIGNATED PALATINE, ILLINOIS, AS YOUR RESIDENCE FOR SEPARATION, AND YOUR PERSONNEL RECORDS DID NOT CONTAIN ANY REFERENCE TO TACOMA, WASHINGTON.
IN YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 10, 1966, YOU QUOTED SECTION I.C.9.B. OF ICA MANUAL ORDER NO. 560.2 IN SUPPORT OF YOUR VIEW THAT TACOMA, WASHINGTON, SHOULD HAVE BEEN REGARDED AS YOUR PLACE OF RESIDENCE FOR SEPARATION. THAT REGULATION, DATED OCTOBER 23, 1958, WAS NOT IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF YOUR RETURN TRAVEL TO THIS COUNTRY, BUT WAS SUPERSEDED BY ICA MANUAL ORDER NO. 560.2, SECTION IV, EFFECTIVE JUNE 15, 1960, WHICH PROVIDED IN PART AS FOLLOWS:
"2. FOR APPOINTMENT AND SEPARATION
"THE EMPLOYEE'S DESIGNATED PLACE OF RESIDENCE OR HOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPOINTMENT AND SEPARATION OR SHIPMENT OF REMAINS IS THE PLACE IN THE UNITED STATES AT WHICH THE EMPLOYEE RESIDED AT THE TIME OF APPOINTMENT OR, IF APPOINTED WHILE TEMPORARILY EMPLOYED AWAY FROM HIS PERMANENT RESIDENCE ELSEWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES OR IN AN OVERSEAS AREA, THE PLACE AT WHICH HE LAST RESIDED IN THE UNITED STATES OR HIS PERMANENT RESIDENCE. IF THE EMPLOYEE HAS MORE THAN ONE PLACE OF RESIDENCE HE MUST SPECIFY THE POINT AT WHICH HE, HIS FAMILY AND EFFECTS ARE TO BEGIN MOVEMENT FOR THE POST AND THE POINT TO WHICH HE WISHES TO BE RETURNED UPON SEPARATION. ONCE THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE A DETERMINATION AS TO HIS PLACE OF RESIDENCE FOR APPOINTMENT AND SEPARATION NO CHANGE OF ADDRESS WILL BE APPROVED.'
SINCE YOUR LAST DESIGNATED PLACE OF RESIDENCE WAS PALATINE, ILLINOIS, AND THE GOVERNMENT HAS ALREADY PAID AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE COST OF SHIPPING YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS TO PALATINE, ILLINOIS, YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO FURTHER REIMBURSEMENT.
THE SECOND ITEM YOU QUESTION RELATES TO THE SHIPMENT OF YOUR WIFE'S PERSONAL EFFECTS FROM STORAGE IN BELGIUM TO BOGOTA, COLUMBIA, DURING THE YEARS 1959 AND 1960. IN CONNECTION WITH THIS ITEM YOU APPARENTLY INTENDED TO ENCLOSE WITH YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 10, 1966, A LETTER ADDRESSED TO MR. CHARLES P. FOSSUM CONTAINING YOUR REASONS FOR RESIGNING FROM THE SERVICE. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY ENCLOSURES WITH YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 10, 1966. HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE IN OUR FILE A COPY OF A LETTER DATED JANUARY 5, 1962, ADDRESSED TO MR. CHARLES P. FOSSUM, WHICH SETS FORTH YOUR REASONS FOR RESIGNING FROM THE INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ADMINISTRATION. APPARENTLY, THAT IS THE LETTER WHICH YOU INTENDED TO TRANSMIT WITH YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 10, 1966. SINCE WE PREVIOUSLY HAVE CONSIDERED YOUR LETTER ADDRESSED TO MR. FOSSUM IN OUR REVIEW OF YOUR CLAIM WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF SUCH EVIDENCE IS WARRANTED AT THIS TIME.
FINALLY, YOU QUESTION OUR DISALLOWANCE OF THE SUM OF $32.45, REPRESENTING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE AMOUNT CLAIMED BY YOU AS THE CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF DIRECT ROUND-TRIP TRAVEL BY AIR BETWEEN BOGOTA AND THE UNITED STATES IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR HOME LEAVE TRAVEL IN1961, AND THE CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF SUCH TRAVEL AS DETERMINED BY YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE. YOU POINT OUT THAT THE CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF THE TRAVEL AS DETERMINED BY YOUR AGENCY WAS BASED UPON THE USE OF PROPELLER-DRIVEN AIRCRAFT, WHEREAS YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO UTILIZE JET AIRCRAFT. THE REGULATIONS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ADMINISTRATION IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF YOUR HOME LEAVE TRAVEL PROVIDED THAT "EACH AUTHORIZED TRAVELER SHALL BE ALLOWED A FIRST-CLASS SEAT ON PROPELLER-DRIVEN OR JET AIRCRAFT.' THEREFORE, SINCE THE AMOUNT CLAIMED BY YOU FOR THE TRAVEL IN QUESTION IS NOT IN EXCESS OF THE CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF ROUND-TRIP TRAVEL BY FIRST-CLASS JET BETWEEN BOGOTA AND CHICAGO, AS DETERMINED BY OUR OFFICE, WE ARE TODAY AUTHORIZING OUR CLAIMS DIVISION TO ALLOW YOU AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $32.45.