Skip to Highlights
Highlights

Is not entitled to travel expenses and mileage when he declared Columbia. Who was residing in Fayetteville. Captain Lee was advised that he would not be acceptable as a candidate since he resided in North Carolina. Which is within commuting distance of Silver Spring. Captain Lee was ordered to active duty for 138 days. He now claims meal expenses and local mileage on the basis that he was misled by the Army into listing his residence as Columbia. That the Army was fully aware at all times that his actual residence was Fayetteville. Provides that a member is not entitled to per diem or actual expense allowance for duty when the member commutes daily from home or place from which called to active duty and the permanent duty station or where both are within reasonable commuting distance of each other.

View Decision

B-237660, May 4, 1990

MILITARY PERSONNEL - Travel - Temporary duty - Travel expenses - Reimbursement DIGEST: A member of the U.S. Army Reserve serving a 138 day Temporary Tour of Active Duty in the Washington, D.C. area, after responding to a request by Army Personnel for a legal officer residing in that area, is not entitled to travel expenses and mileage when he declared Columbia, Maryland, as his residence rather than his actual home in Fayetteville, North Carolina, in order to qualify for the selection.

Captain Clifford L. Lee, II, USAR:

Captain Clifford L. Lee, II, USAR, appeals a decision of our Claims Group denying his claim for $4,587 in daily meals and $1,459.50 for mileage in connection with a Temporary Tour of Active Duty performed for 138 days. We uphold that denial on the following basis.

Captain Lee, who was residing in Fayetteville, North Carolina, responded to a request by the United States Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA), Washington, D.C., through the U.S. Army Personnel Center, to nominate a Reserve Judge Advocate General Corps officer for temporary duty. USAPDA stipulated that only officers from the Washington area would be considered for the assignment because travel allowances for an officer in a travel status could exceed $10,000 for the 138 day period of duty.

Initially, Captain Lee was advised that he would not be acceptable as a candidate since he resided in North Carolina. He advised the Army Personnel Center that he would relocate to Columbia, Maryland, which is within commuting distance of Silver Spring, and that he would not seek reimbursement for his travel expenses. He furnished a Columbia, Maryland, home address. By orders dated April 9, 1987, addressed to Columbia, Maryland, but mailed to Fayetteville, North Carolina, Captain Lee was ordered to active duty for 138 days. The orders stated that the temporary duty would be at no expense to the government. He now claims meal expenses and local mileage on the basis that he was misled by the Army into listing his residence as Columbia, Maryland, rather than Fayetteville, North Carolina, and that the Army was fully aware at all times that his actual residence was Fayetteville, North Carolina.

ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION

Subsection 404(a) of title 37, United States Code, authorizes the payment of certain allowances to members of Reserve components when away from home to perform active duty for short periods. Subparagraph U7150-A1, b of volume 1 of the Joint Federal Travel Regulations, effective January 1, 1987, provides that a member is not entitled to per diem or actual expense allowance for duty when the member commutes daily from home or place from which called to active duty and the permanent duty station or where both are within reasonable commuting distance of each other.

While Captain Lee contends that his actual residence was in Fayetteville, North Carolina, the evidence before us indicates that for the purpose of this tour of duty his residence was located in Columbia, Maryland. The fact that both his original orders and the amendment to them were addressed to a specific street address in Columbia, Maryland, shows that he had indicated to the Army Personnel Center that he was relocating in order to qualify for the assignment. We find nothing in the record that indicates that the Army was aware that his residence was in Fayetteville during this period of duty. The record shows that while he was living in Fayetteville prior to the time the orders were issued April 9, l987, he intended to change his residence to Columbia prior to the reporting date for active duty April 20, l987. In these circumstances we must conclude that his residence at the time of the duty was Columbia, Maryland. Accordingly, his claim must be denied.

GAO Contacts