B-161408, JUN 1, 1967

B-161408, JUN 1, 1967

PRECIS-UNAVAILABLE

LIEUTENANT COLONEL J. H. LEGGETT, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER AND ENCLOSURES OF APRIL 27, 1967, REFERENCE: SERIAL D5/573, WHEREIN YOU REQUEST THIS OFFICE TO REVIEW THE CLAIM OF MR. HARVEY A. TEVES, AN EMPLOYEE OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, AS TO WHETHER HIS MOTHER WAS A MEMBER OF HIS HOUSEHOLD AND A MEMBER OF HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY AT THE TIME HIS PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION OCCURRED AND, THEREFORE, ELIGIBLE FOR BENEFITS UNDER PUB. L. 89 516 DATED JULY 21, 1966.

THE RECORD INDICATES THAT MR. TEVES PERFORMED PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION TRAVEL FROM THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, MARYLAND, TO HONOLULU, HAWAII, AND REPORTED TO HIS NEW DUTY STATION ON AUGUST 19, 1966. THE RECORD FURTHER DISCOSES THAT UP UNTIL THE TIME MR. TEVES REPORTED FOR DUTY HIS MOTHER DID NOT RESIDE WITH HIM BUT MAINTAINED HER OWN RESIDENCE IN HAWAII AND DID NOT BECOME DEPENDENT UPON MR. TEVES UNTIL APPROXIMATELY AUGUST 10, 1966, AND DID NOT ACTUALLY RESIDE WITH HER SON UNTIL AUGUST 29, 1966.

THE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56, SECTION 1.2D, DEFINES "IMMEDIATE FAMILY" AS:

"*** ANY OF THE FOLLOWING NAMED MEMBERS OF THE EMPLOYEE'S HOUSEHOLD AT THE TIME HE REPORTS FOR DUTY AT HIS NEW PERMANENT DUTY STATION: SPOUSE, CHILDREN (INCLUDING STEPCHILDREN AND ADOPTED CHILDREN) UNMARRIED AND UNDER TWENTY-ONE YEARS OF AGE OR PHYSICALLY OR MENTALLY INCAPABLE OF SUPPORTING THEMSELVES REGARDLESS OF AGE, OR DEPENDENT PARENTS OF THE EMPLOYEE AND OF THE EMPLOYEE'S SPOUSE."

FOR A PERSON TO BE COVERED BY THIS DEFINITION AND CONSEQUENTLY OBTAIN THE BENEFITS OF PUB. L. 89-516, IT WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR HER OR HIM TO (1) BE A MEMBER OF THE EMPLOYEE'S HOUSEHOLD, OR (2) A DEPENDENT PARENT OF EITHER SPOUSE.

A LETTER IN THE FILE SIGNED BY THE CHIEF, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, INDICATES THAT MR. TEVES' MOTHER WAS DIAGNOSED AS A TERMINAL CANCER CASE AND DID IN FACT BECOME SOLELY DEPENDENT UPON TEVES ON OR ABOUT AUGUST 10, 1966; ALSO, THAT AT THE TIME THE EMPLOYEE ARRIVED AT HIS NEW OFFICIAL DUTY STATION HIS MOTHER WAS STILL HOSPITALIZED BUT WAS IN FACT FULLY DEPENDENT UPON HIM AND WOULD HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF HIS HOUSEHOLD AT THE TIME OF HIS ARRIVAL WERE IT NOT FOR HER CONFINEMENT. IT IS FURTHER INDICATED THAT HAD MRS. TEVES BEEN RELEASED FROM THE HOSPITAL TWO WEEKS SOONER SHE WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE PHYSICALLY BEEN A MEMBER OF THE TEVES' HOUSEHOLD. ADDITION, THE FILE INDICATES THAT MR. TEVES HAS ACCEPTED RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS MOTHER'S MEDICAL EXPENSES.

UNDER THE RELATED CIRCUMSTANCES WE SEE NO REASON WHY HIS MOTHER MAY NOT BE REGARDED AS A MEMBER OF HIS HOUSEHOLD AND A MEMBER OF HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY AT THE TIME THE PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION OCCURRED. THE AMOUNT DUE UNDER THE CLAIM MAY BE COMPUTED ACCORDINGLY.