B-133733, DEC. 17, 1957

TO COLONEL WILLIAM M. KASPER:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 28, 1957, AND ENCLOSURE, REQUESTING REVIEW OF SETTLEMENT DATED AUGUST 1, 1957, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST OF COMMERCIAL TRANSPORTATION FOR YOUR DEPENDENTS FROM NEW YORK, NEW YORK, TO LEHAVRE, FRANCE, IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES SHOWN.

BY TRAVEL ORDERS DATED AUGUST 15, 1956, YOUR DEPENDENTS (WIFE AND FOUR CHILDREN) WERE AUTHORIZED TO PROCEED FROM TEHERAN, IRAN, TO THE UNITED STATES ON OR ABOUT AUGUST 21, 1956. THE ORDERS WERE ISSUED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF PARAGRAPH 7009-3, JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, AND RECITED THAT THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF YOUR DEPENDENTS FROM TEHERAN, IRAN, TO THE AERIAL PORT OF DEBARKATION IN THE UNITED STATES HAD BEEN FURNISHED BY THE IMPERIAL IRANIAN ARMY, AND THAT THE COST OF THEIR TRANSPORTATION BEYOND THE AERIAL PORT OF DEBARKATION WOULD NOT BE FURNISHED PRIOR TO YOUR RETURN TO THE UNITED STATES UNDER PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS. YOU SAY THAT YOUR DEPENDENTS LEFT IRAN FOR THE UNITED STATES ON AUGUST 21, 1956. BY ORDERS DATED AUGUST 18, 1956, YOU WERE RELEASED FROM ASSIGNMENT TO DUTY WITH THE ARMISH-MAAG IRAN, TEHERAN, IRAN, AND ASSIGNED TO STUDENT DETACHMENT ARMC CARLISLE BARRACKS, PENNSYLVANIA, WITH STATION IN PARIS, FRANCE, WHERE YOU WERE TO REPORT ABOUT AUGUST 27, 1956, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ATTENDING A COURSE OF INSTRUCTION. PARAGRAPH 5 OF SUCH ORDERS AUTHORIZED THE TRANSPORTATION OF YOUR DEPENDENTS FROM CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES TO PARIS, FRANCE, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF CATEGORY II, PARAGRAPH 3A, CHANGE 1, ARMY REGULATIONS 55-107. THE CHIEF OF TRANSPORTATION HAS REPORTED THAT GOVERNMENT SURFACE AND AIR TRANSPORTATION WAS AVAILABLE FOR ALL DEPENDENTS ELIGIBLE TO TRAVEL FROM THE UNITED STATES TO EUROPE DURING THE PERIOD IN QUESTION; THAT MRS. KASPER WAS NOTIFIED BY THE BROOKLYN ARMY TERMINAL THAT A PORT CALL WOULD BE ISSUED FOR HER TRAVEL ABOARD A GOVERNMENT VESSEL, BUT THAT SHE DECLINED THE ISSUANCE OF THE PORT CALL, INDICATING THAT SHE DESIRED TO TRAVEL WITH HER CHILDREN BY COMMERCIAL MEANS AT HER OWN EXPENSE. YOUR DEPENDENTS TRAVELED AT PERSONAL EXPENSE FROM NEW YORK, NEW YORK, TO LEHAVRE, FRANCE, BY COMMERCIAL VESSEL, LEAVING NEW YORK ON OCTOBER 13, 1956.

ORDINARILY, TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS IS AUTHORIZED ONLY AFTER ISSUANCE OF PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS FOR THE MEMBER CONCERNED. IN ADDITION TO THE AUTHORITY FOR TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS OF MILITARY PERSONNEL AT PUBLIC EXPENSE ON THE BASIS OF A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, SECTION 303 (C) OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949, 63 STAT. 814, PROVIDES THAT WHEN ORDERS DIRECTING A CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION FOR THE MEMBER CONCERNED HAVE NOT BEEN ISSUED OR WHEN ORDERS ARE OF SUCH NATURE THAT THEY CANNOT BE USED AS AUTHORITY FOR TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS, THE SECRETARIES CONCERNED MAY, NEVERTHELESS, AUTHORIZE THE MOVEMENT OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE, BUT ONLY UNDER UNUSUAL OR EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES. REGULATIONS PROVIDING FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS FROM STATIONS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES ISSUED PURSUANT TO THAT AUTHORITY ARE CONTAINED IN PARAGRAPH 7009 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS.

SUBPARAGRAPH 7009-3 OF THE REGULATIONS PROVIDES THAT, UPON THE REQUEST OF A MEMBER OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS, ORDERS MAY BE ISSUED AUTHORIZING ADVANCED RETURN OF HIS DEPENDENTS TO THE UNITED STATES UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, PROVIDED THE ORDERS SPECIFICALLY LIMIT THE TRANSPORTATION TO BE FURNISHED TO TRANSPORTATION FROM THE OVERSEAS STATION TO THE PORT OF DEBARKATION IN THE UNITED STATES. IT IS FURTHER PROVIDED THAT UPON THE COMPLETION OF THE OVERSEAS TOUR OF DUTY, AND TRANSFER OF THE MEMBER UNDER PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS TO ANOTHER OVERSEAS DUTY STATION FOR AN ADDITIONAL TOUR OF DUTY OF AT LEAST 18 MONTHS' DURATION, OR TO A DUTY STATION IN CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES, TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS AUTHORIZED, IF OTHERWISE PROPER, AT NOT TO EXCEED ENTITLEMENT FROM THE PORT OF DEBARKATION IN THE UNITED STATES TO WHICH RETURNED TO THE NEW DUTY STATION.

THE RECORD DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY SHOW WHY THE ORDERS OF AUGUST 18, 1956, AUTHORIZED YOUR DEPENDENTS TO TRAVEL FROM THE UNITED STATES TO FRANCE ON A SPACE AVAILABLE BASIS ONLY AS PROVIDED IN THE ARMY REGULATIONS THERE CITED. IT IS NOT SHOWN WHEN YOUR THEN CURRENT OVERSEAS TOUR OF DUTY WAS COMPLETED. IF YOUR TOUR OF DUTY IN TEHERAN HAD NOT BEEN COMPLETED AT THAT TIME, THOSE ORDERS WOULD HAVE FURNISHED NO BASIS FOR SUCH TRAVEL AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE. THE SAME RESULT WOULD FOLLOW EVEN IF YOUR TOUR OF DUTY WAS THEN BEING COMPLETED, SINCE THE ORDERS ASSIGNING YOU TO DUTY IN PARIS WERE DELIVERED TO YOU BEFORE YOUR DEPENDENTS LEFT TEHERAN. IF SUCH ORDERS PROPERLY MAY BE VIEWED AS PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS DIRECTING A NEW TOUR OF DUTY OVERSEAS--- THE ORDERS DID NOT INDICATE THE LENGTH OF THAT ASSIGNMENT SINCE YOU WERE TO REPORT AT PARIS ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ATTENDING A COURSE OF INSTRUCTION, PRESUMABLY FOR A PERIOD OF LESS THAN 18 MONTHS- - THEY SERVED AS A BASIS FOR YOUR DEPENDENTS' TRAVEL TO PARIS AND THEIR ADVANCE TRAVEL TO THE UNITED STATES WOULD HAVE TO BE REGARDED AS HAVING BEEN PERFORMED IN CONNECTION WITH THE NEW TOUR OF DUTY DIRECTED IN SUCH ORDERS. RETURN TRAVEL WOULD BE AUTHORIZED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE ONLY AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF ORDERS DIRECTING A THIRD TOUR OF DUTY OVERSEAS. SINCE YOUR DEPENDENTS WERE NOT AUTHORIZED TO TRAVEL FROM THE UNITED STATES TO FRANCE AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IN EITHER OF THE ALTERNATE SITUATIONS MENTIONED ABOVE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ORDERS OF AUGUST 18, 1956, PROPERLY AUTHORIZED TRAVEL BY GOVERNMENT VESSEL ON A SPACE AVAILABLE BASIS ONLY.

THE FACT THAT YOUR DEPENDENTS TRAVELED FROM IRAN TO THE UNITED STATES AT THE EXPENSE OF THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT UNDER THE TERMS OF THE MISSION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES AND IRAN DOES NOT INCREASE YOUR RIGHTS IN THE MATTER AS FIXED IN THE CONTROLLING STATUTE AND REGULATIONS. IF YOUR DEPENDENTS HAD BEEN ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FROM THE UNITED STATES TO FRANCE ON A SPACE REQUIREMENT BASIS, IT SEEMS CLEAR THAT THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN FURNISHED SUCH TRANSPORTATION ON A GOVERNMENT VESSEL.

ACCORDINGLY THERE IS NO AUTHORITY FOR PAYMENT OF YOUR CLAIM AND THE SETTLEMENT OF AUGUST 1, 1957, IS SUSTAINED.