Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

ing to dispose of their trailers and purchase necessary household effects prior to the effective dates of their transfer orders.

Transportation of household effects of military personnel upon changes of station now is authorized by section 12 of the Pay Readjustment Act of 1942, as amended by section 205 (a) of the act of August 2, 1946, 60 Stat. 860, as follows:

Upon changes of station, members of the services mentioned in the title of this Act shall be entitled to transportation (including packing, crating, drayage, temporary storage, and unpacking) of baggage and household goods and effects, or reimbursement therefor, as authorized by regulations prescribed by the heads of the department concerned, which shall be uniform for the services mentioned and shall be approved by the President. Such transportation may be by rail, water, or van, without regard to comparative costs.

While the built-in facilities of house trailers may be considered as household effects within the meaning of the statute, a trailer, as such, is clearly not "baggage and household goods and effects," and may not be transported at Government expense under such authority. The statute authorizes inter alia, the packing, crating, transportation, and unpacking of baggage and household goods and effects of military personnel, but there is no authorization in the statute to expend a greater amount for one service, by including an unauthorized item in the shipment, in lieu of furnishing other authorized services. Any such arrangement is precluded by the fundamental rule of law laid down in section 3678, Revised Statutes, 31 U. S. C. 628, that:

Except as otherwise provided by law, sums appropriated for the various branches of expenditure in the public service shall be applied solely to the objects for which they are respectively made, and for no others.

A trailer is not designed for, and is not considered as adaptable for, use as a shipping container of goods, but ordinarily it would itself be required to be boxed or packed and crated for overseas shipment. If not, it could be shipped only at the shipper's risk and the Government would be liable to the individual owner for damages in transit. Act of May 29, 1945, 59 Stat. 225, 31 U. S. C., Supp. V, 222c. It may be observed, moreover, that to the extent the Government might pay the cost of such transportation, etc., of privately owned trailers to overseas stations and return, at an average cost of as much as $1,000 or more, it would, in effect, be providing housing facilities at the overseas stations for personnel being paid full rental or quarters allowances on the basis that they were required to provide their own quarters. But, however that may be, it must be concluded that the suggested payments are not authorized by the statute, supra, or under appropriations made pursuant thereto. Cf. decision of February 4, 1944, B-39498, to the Federal Security Administrator.

(B-69808)

TRAVELING EXPENSES-PRIVATE PARTIES CONFERRING UPON GOVERNMENT MATTERS

Private persons requested by a proper Government official to travel for the purpose of conferring upon Government matters may be regarded as "persons serving without compensation" under section 5 of the administrative expense statute of August 2, 1946, without being inducted into Government service, and, as such, may have their traveling expenses paid or be reimbursed actual and necessary traveling expenses and may be allowed not to exceed $10 per diem in lieu of subsistence.

Comptroller General Warren to the Secretary of Commerce, October 2, 1947: I have your letter of September 24, 1947, in which you request to be advised whether your department may pay the traveling expenses of private persons called to Washington by a proper department officer to confer on official business with the President's Air Policy Commission without formally inducting such persons into the service of the department. Also, in the event the answer to that question is in the affirmative, you request information whether such persons may be considered as persons serving without compensation and, therefore, be granted a per diem allowance in lieu of subsistence at a rate not exceeding $10 in accordance with section 5 of Public Law 600, approved August 2, 1946, 60 Stat. 808.

Your letter recognizes-by citing 8 Comp. Gen. 465-that there exists a precedent for allowing the payment of traveling expenses of persons who are not Government employees but who have been requested by a proper officer to come to the seat of government on official business. See, also, 21 Comp. Gen. 29; id. 409; id. 610. Your doubt appears to be whether such decisions still are for application in view of the specific provisions appearing in various statutes in recent years with reference to traveling expenses of persons serving on a whenactually-employed basis or at $1 per annum.

No authority is cited for the creation of the referred-to commission, but it is assumed for the purpose of this decision-but without deciding-that the creation of the President's Air Policy Commission was not in violation of the provisions of section 3681, R. S., 31 U. S. C. 672, and section 9 of the act of March 4, 1909, 35 Stat. 1027, 31 U. S. C. 673. Compare section 214 of the Independent Offices Appropriation Act, 1946, approved May 3, 1945, 59 Stat. 134, and see, also, 5 Comp. Gen. 553; 11 id. 331; and decision of November 22, 1946, B-60907, 26 Comp. Gen. 354, to the Acting Chairman, Federal Communications Com

mission.

I do not know of any legislation purporting to prohibit the payment of traveling expenses of persons called by proper authority to

confer on official Government business. As indicated in your letter, there has been considerable legislation in recent years, usually contained in appropriations, which specifically has referred to the traveling expenses of persons serving without compensation, or at $1 per annum. Generally, the purpose of such legislation has been to provide specific authorization for the payment of the traveling expenses and a per diem allowance on account of persons serving away from their homes without compensation or at nominal compensation. Section 5 of Public Law 600, 60 Stat. 808, was intended to do away with the necessity of such specific appropriation provisions. That section provides:

Persons in the Government service employed intermittently as consultants or experts and receiving compensation on a per diem when actually employed basis may be allowed travel expenses while away from their homes or regular places of business, including per diem in lieu of subsistence while at place of such employment, in accordance with the Standardized Government Travel Regulations, Subsistence Expense Act of 1926, as amended (5 U. S. C. 821-833), and the Act of February 14, 1931, as amended by this Act, and persons serving without compensation or at $1 per annum may be allowed, while away from their homes or regular places of business, transportation in accordance with said regulations and said Act of February 14, 1931, as so amended, and not to exceed $10 per diem in lieu of subsistence en route and at place of such service or employment unless a higher rate is specifically provided in an appropriation or other Act.

It is my view that persons who are not Government officers or employees, when requested by a proper officer to travel for the purpose of conferring upon official Government matters, may be regarded as "persons serving without compensation" as these words are used in said statute, and may have their traveling expenses paid by the department or be reimbursed their actual and necessary traveling expenses in accordance with the above-quoted statute. Also, in accordance with that section of the statute, not to exceed a $10 per diem in lieu of subsistence may be allowed providing, of course, that the request specifically states that travel expenses will be allowed and prescribes the amount of per diem. Under such circumstances there is no necessity for inducting the traveler into the service of the Department of Commerce. Your questions are answered accordingly.

(B-68125)

TRAVELING EXPENSES-TRANSFERS-TRAVEL FROM PLACE OF LEAVE WITHOUT PAY

An employee who, pursuant to change of station orders providing for reimbursement of travel expenses incurred, traveled to his new station from a place where he was on leave without pay which had been granted immediately upon his return from military service and restoration to duty at his former station, is entitled to be reimbursed traveling expenses actually incurred

a lesser amount than would have been incurred had he traveled directly from the old to new station-without any deduction for the cost of returning from the place of leave to the old station. Compare 21 Comp. Gen. 224. Comptroller General Warren to W. H. Barrett, Department of Commerce, October 3, 1947:

Reference is made to your letter of July 16, 1947, as follows:

Reference: Inclosed reimbursement voucher of Robert W. Nicholson for $22.69. Subject: Payment of travel expenses of an employee who was placed on leave without pay at the expiration of his military furlough and whose station was changed at the expiration of his leave without pay. The above-referenced employee was restored to duty at his former official station, Dayton, Ohio at the expiration of his military furlough and immediately placed on leave without pay for the purpose of attending school. He did not perform any service at Dayton, Ohio upon his restoration to duty. The permanent official station of the employee was changed from Dayton, Ohio, to Minneapolis, Minnesota at the expiration of the leave without pay. A copy of Letter of Authorization No. 1091, dated April 25, 1947 covering the transfer is inclosed. The attached voucher covers the employee's claim for travel expenses from Chesterton, Indiana (his former home) to Minneapolis, Minnesota, his new official station. Your decision is requested as to whether the employee's travel expenses may be paid from the place where he was on leave without pay to the new station following his restoration to duty on May 9, 1947, from a leave without pay status.

Request for your decision is made under the provisions of Section 3 of the Act of December 29, 1941 (55 Stat. 876).

Apparently, the doubt concerning your authority to certify the subject voucher for payment arises by reason of the rule that when an employee's official station is changed while he is in a leave status, and, instead of returning to his old station, he elects to report directly to the new station, he must bear the expense thereof equivalent to the cost of returning to his old station. See 21 Comp. Gen. 224, and decisions cited therein.

In this case, it appears that the employee was a returned veteran who was restored to duty at his old station (Dayton, Ohio); that he performed no services at his old station upon his restoration to duty but immediately was placed on leave without pay for the purpose of attending school; that the travel order specifically directed the employee to travel from the place he was on leave without pay at Chesterton, Indiana, to his new duty station at Minneapolis, Minnesota; and that said order provided that the employee would be reimbursed for the "expenses incurred" in connection with said travel. Moreover, there appears to have been no necessity or reason from the Government's standpoint for having the employee return to his old station at the expiration of his leave without pay.

Under such circumstances, and since the expense incurred in reporting to the new station from the place where the employee was on leave apparently was less than the expense that would have been incurred had the employee not been on leave and had traveled from the old to the

new station, the employee properly may be regarded as entitled to be reimbursed for the expenses actually incurred pursuant to the travel order involved. Cf. B-66253, July 29, 1947, 27 Comp. Gen. 32.

Accordingly, the voucher, which is returned herewith, may be certified for payment, if correct and proper in other respects.

(B-67921)

RETIRED PAY; RETIREMENT-EFFECTIVE DATE-FORMER OFFICERS OF COAST GUARD RESERVE RELEASED FOR PHYSICAL DISABILITY Former officers of the Coast Guard Reserve who have been released from active service, without pay, for physical disability pursuant to the decision of a retiring board, board of medical survey, or disposition board are entitled upon review of the decision resulting in their release requested under the provisions of section 302 (a) of the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, as amended, to be retired with pay if, as a result of such review, retirement (otherwise authorized by law) is recommended by the review board, and approved by competent authority.

The general rule that the effective date of the retirement of a regular officer of the armed services is governed by the date when the President approves his retirement and by the uniform retirement date act of April 23, 1930, is applicable to disability retirements of former Coast Guard Reserve officers who, after being released from active duty without pay for physical disability pursuant to the decision of a retiring, etc., board, request a review of such decision under the provisions of section 302 (a) of the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, as amended, and are retired as a result of such review.

Assistant Comptroller General Yates to Lt. J. A. Wilber, U. S. Coast Guard, October 8, 1947:

There has been considered your letter of June 27, 1947, requesting a decision as to the rate of retired pay, if any, to which Lieutenant Edward J. Motley, USCGR (Ret.) and Lieutenant (jg) Partee A. Fleming, USCGR (Ret.) are entitled and the effective date from which such retired pay is payable. The pertinent facts and the specific questions submitted are stated in your letter as follows:

Mr. Motley executed oath of office as Chief Machinist, USCGR (permanent appointment) on 14 July, 1942, was called to and reported for active duty on 3 August, 1942; was advanced to the rank of Lieutenant (junior grade) USCGR on 31 August, 1943 and to the rank of Lieutenant, USCGR on 27 September, 1944, under the provisions of the Temporary Promotion Act of July 24, 1941 (34 USC 350-350j). Under the provisions of the Pay Readjustment Act of 1942 as amended, and on 31 August, 1943, date of Presidential approval of promotion to the rank of Lieutenant (junior grade), USCGR, he became entitled to the pay and allowances of the third period and on 27 September, 1944, date of Presidential approval of promotion to the rank of Lieutenant, USCGR, to the pay and allowances of the fourth period by reason of the following service: 3 April, 1912 to 23 February, 1916, enlisted, regular Navy, 3 years, 10 months, 20 days; 7 May, 1917 to 25 May 1933, enlisted, U. S. Naval Reserve Force and U. S. Naval Reserve, 16 years, 2 days; 26 May, 1933 to 24 May, 1941, enlisted U. S. Naval Reserve, 7 years, 11 months, 29 days; 3 August 1942 to 9 May, 1946, commissioned service, U. S. Coast Guard Reserve (active duty), 3 years, 9 months, 6 days. Total service for pay purposes, 31 years, 8 months, 17 days. This officer appeared

« ÎnapoiContinuă »