of uniform clothing have been issued under a system by which title thereto remains in the United States, as such clothing would not be "lost, abandoned or unclaimed personal property" within the meaning of that Act. If it is administratively impossible to determine into which of these categories the clothing in question falls, it would appear that the advantage to the Army in presuming that title thereto is vested in the United States would far outweigh the costs resulting from the few valid claims by members of the Army (see par 8, AR 210-180, c.s.) for reimbursement for, or replacement of, clothing which belonged to the claimant but was disposed of as government property. JAGA 1952/3872. 12 May 1952. VI. SALE, LOAN, OR OTHER DISPOSITION § 93. In General Under current regulations, supervising chaplains do not have the authority to loan government property to a civilian minister for the purpose of holding religious services for both military and civilian personnel in a civilian church. However, AR 660-10, 7 December 1951, may be changed to provide such authority, provided the right to immediate possession and constructive control over the property remains in the government. (Citing SPJGA 1944/1292, 29 Jan 1944; JAGT 1951/5984, 4 Oct 1951; JAGT 1952/8124, 20 Nov 1952; JAGT 1951/6751, 18 Oct 1951; JAGA 1951/4511, 9 Jul 1951.) JAGA 1953/2942. 10 April 1953. § 95. Sale or Loan to Civilian Officers and Employees § 95,11. Overseas employees. An opinion was requested whether issue of uniform clothing could legally be made to civilian chauffeurs working for the United States Army in Austria, assuming (a) that issue will be effected on a memorandum receipt basis, without cost to the individual, and items to be withdrawn when employment is terminated and (b) that certain items proposed to be issued are in CS or better condition. Held: Issue of uniform clothing which is in CS or better condition may not legally be made to civilian chauffeurs under the stated assumptions. (Citing 3 Comp Gen 443; 22 Comp Gen 1015; SPJGA 1943/17168, 20 Jan 1944; JAGA 1952/3120, 9 Apr 1952; JAGA 1952/ 3692, 12 May 1952; par 23, AR 600–32, c.s.; subpar 3a and par 5, SR 620-80-5, 20 Jul 1949; par 3, SR 32-210-5, 3 Oct 1952.) Held also: In reply to a further inquiry as to whether the issue could be accomplished if all clothing items were in Class X condition, it was held that no general conclusion could be reached. It is understood that such classification refers to excess or surplus clothing. Clothing could not be issued as requested solely for the reason that it was excess to station requirements or surplus to Department of the Army needs. However, property which is classified as "scrap, salvage, or uneconomically repairable" may be disposed of according to the provisions of Army Regulations 755-10, 25 Jan 1952. Should the items of uniform clothing be so classified that abandonment, destruction or dona tion pursuant to Army Regulations 755-10, supra, would be justified, there would be no legal objection to loaning such clothing to civilian chauffeurs employed by the United States Army in Austria as requested. (Citing subpar 11e, AR 755-10, 25 Jan 1952; Title IV of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (63 Stat 397), as amended (40 USC 511 et seq); with regard to the disposal of foreign excess property, see CSJAGT 1949/5528, 4 Aug 1949; JAGT 1951/2900, 19 Apr 1951; JAGT 1952/9358, 8 Dec 1952; see also SPJGA 1942/3033, 11 Jul 1942; SPJGA 1942/5665, 1 Dec 1942; SPJGA 1945/13012, 18 Dec 1945; JAGA 1951/4318, 27 Jun 1951; JAGA 1953/2151, 6 Mar 1953.) JAGA 1953/6180. 12 August 1953. § 99. Interchange or Loan between Branches or Units of § 99.49. Liability of service member for loss or damage. On memorandum receipt, a naval officer, the commanding officer of a Naval Reserve Training Center, borrowed certain Army mess gear for the use of naval reservists on week-end drills. Certain items were lost in normal use over a period of months. Held: There is no statute applicable to the Navy which would impose personal financial liability upon a member of the Navy for the loss of government property under these circumstances. It has been consistently held that the pay and allowances of a member of the Navy may not be withheld in settlement for loss or damage to government property. The same rule applies whether the government property in question be in custody of the Navy or of another branch of the Armed Services. (Citing JAGA 1953/202, 1 March 1953, restricted.) JAGA 1953/9918. 29 December 1953. § 103. Excess, Surplus, or Obsolete Supplies and Equipment § 103.1. Generally. Sale of "all" equipment on an Air Force base as including classified military radar mistakenly left on base contrary to a directive, see Turney v. United States, WAR § 31. TRANSPORTATION II. MILITARY PERSONNEL AND DEPENDENTS. A. IN GENERAL. § 17. Generally. § 23. Travel Orders, Generally. § 29. Quarters and Subsistence Allowance; Per Diem. § 33. Monetary Allowance in Lieu of Transportation. § 35. Allowances on Separation from Service; Extension. B. DEPENDENTS. § 43. In General. § 46. Transportation to Station outside United States. § 47. Transportation from Stations outside United States. III. HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND OTHER PROPERTY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL AND DEPENDENTS. $ 59. In General. § 65. Weight and Other Limits. § 67. Storage. II. MILITARY PERSONNEL AND DEPENDENTS A. IN GENERAL § 17. Generally A provision of the Act of 5 June 1920 (41 Stat 948, 975, 10 USC 758), which "authorizes" the Secretary of the Army to provide one cent per mile transportation for disabled soldiers given furloughs from hospitals, does not impose a mandatory requirement upon the Secretary of the Army to provide one cent per mile transportation for such persons in the absence of an appropriation by Congress specifically providing funds to carry out such provision. (See the following cases wherein the term "authorized" as used in a statute was construed: 8 Op Atty Gen 39; 8 Op Atty Gen 41; 8 Op Atty Gen 111; 15 Op Atty Gen 621; 19 Op Atty Gen 324; 19 Op Atty Gen 575; 21 Op Atty Gen 167; 21 Op Atty Gen 391; 21 Op Atty Gen 420; Mason et al v. Fearson (1850), 50 US 248, 13 L ed 125; Thompson et al v. Richard Roe et al (1859), 63 US 422, 16 L ed 387; United States v. Cornell Steamboat Co. (1906), 202 US 184, 50 L ed 987, 26 S Ct 648; United States Sugar Equalization Board, Inc. v. P. De Ronde & Co. Inc. (1925, CA3d), 7 F2d 981; United States ex rel. McLennan v. Wilbur (1931), 283 US 414, 75 L ed 1148, 51 S Ct 502; Braun v. United States (1934, Ct Cl), 8 F Supp; Red Canyon Sheep Co. et al v. Ickes, Secretary of the Interior et al (1938, App DC), 98 F2d 308; Creek Nation v. United States (1943), 318 US 629, 87 L ed 1046, 63 S Ct 784.) JAGA 1953/1577. 9 March 1953. § 17.21. Retired persons, generally. Subsection 402 (i) of the Career Compensation Act of 1949, 63 Stat 820, 37 USC 272(i), which grants rights to retired members of reserve components equal to rights provided for "retired members" of the regular services, refers only to rights accruing after retirement is effected and not to those rights incident to being retired. Consequently, that subsection does not require the furnishing of equal rights in connection with transportation incident to retirement. MS Comp Gen B-116371, 33 Comp Gen 81. 18 August 1953. § 17.27. Traveling during leave status. A sergeant was relieved from duty in Alaska and directed to report to Fort Hood, Texas, for separation from the service. His orders granted eight days' leave en route and travel by different means of conveyance, including commercial air, was authorized. He traveled by commercial aircraft from Seattle, Washington, to San Antonio, Texas, at personal expense. He became ill en route and was admitted to an Army hospital at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, as a direct casual after his arrival at San Antonio. He was relieved from assignment and duty at Fort Hood and reassigned in grade to the Medical Holding Detachment, Brooke Army Hospital, by orders issued at that hospital. His discharge from the service was effected at Fort Sam Houston. Held: The fact that he traveled from Seattle to Fort Sam Houston in a leave status, does not affect his right to travel and transportation allowances for such travel (Case 16(a), par 4156, Joint Travel Regulations), and while he did not complete travel to Fort Hood, the requirement that he travel thereto was changed by his reassignment to the Medical Holding Detachment, Brooke Army Hospital. Under such circumstances he is entitled to mileage for the travel from Seattle to Fort Sam Houston. (See Case 16(c), par 4156, Joint Travel Regulations.) MS Comp Gen B-116439. 19 August 1953. § 23. Travel Orders, Generally By orders dated 23 January 1952 a certain sergeant was transferred from Fort Dix, New Jersey, to Camp Stoneman, California. The orders authorized 13 days' delay en route to count as leave plus 12 days' travel time to permit travel by privately owned automobile, and directed him to report at Camp Stoneman on 20 February 1952. By orders dated 13 February 1952 his name was deleted from the previous orders. He was detached at Fort Dix on 26 January 1952 and traveled to Camp Stoneman between that date and 20 February 1952. His wife traveled from Fort Dix to Hewitt, Minnesota, 26 to 31 January 1952 and returned to Fort Dix 27 February to 3 March 1952. Held: Since the sergeant would not have been required to depart Fort Dix by rail until 16 February 1952 in order to report at Camp Stoneman on 20 February and since his original orders were cancelled by orders issued on 13 February at Fort Dix there was no authority for payment of travel allowances for travel performed by him and his wife. No official travel is required under change of station orders until such time as the traveler must depart from his old station by ordinary means of transportation to reach his destination on the date designated in the travel orders. Under circumstances where an officer is granted leave or is otherwise authorized to delay in performance of the directed travel, which would include the delay resulting from additional travel time necessarily granted to enable him to travel by automobile for his own convenience and pleasure as distinguished from time consumed in travel by automobile under orders directing such travel as more advantageous to the Government, it is considered that no official travel is required until expiration of such leave or delay and if the orders are cancelled prior thereto any travel which may have been performed is regarded as incident to such delay and the expenses thereof must be borne by the traveler concerned. (Citing Joint Travel Regulations, par 3003b; 8 Comp Gen 524; 9 Comp Gen 315; B-70033, 15 Dec 1947; B-100104, 2 Jan 1951. Paragraph 4150, Change 1, Joint Travel Regulations and par 4153, Change 1, Case 16 and par 7005 are inapplicable.) MS Comp Gen B-117020, 33 Comp Gen 289. 12 January 1954. § 29. Quarters and Subsistence Allowance; Per Diem § 29.1. Generally. By Department of the Army Special Orders, an officer was released from assignment and duty at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and ordered to Fort Richardson, Alaska, for duty, it being provided that he would report to Personnel Center, Fort Lawton, Seattle, Washington, not later than 1 May 1952, for transportation from Seattle Port of Embarkation to destination. He reported at Fort Lawton as directed and, pursuant to orders, departed Fort Lawton on 23 May 1952 for an overseas destination. Ordinarily persons ordered to Fort Lawton for further transportation from the Seattle Port of Embarkation to overseas destination are required to rema in at Fort Lawton until advice is received from the port commander that transportation is available. Further, the entire waiting period is spent at Fort Lawton and not at the Seattle Port of Embarkation, and such period is not a delay occasioned solely by the mode of travel but is occasioned to some extent by necessary personnel processing. Travel Regulations promulgated pursuant to sec 303(a) of the Career Compensation Act of 1949, 63 Stat 813, ML 1949, A pp C. provide (par 30-50-1, 2 and 3) that members are entitled to travel and transportation allowances only while actually in a travel status; that they shall be deemed to be in a travel status while performing travel pursuant to competent travel orders including necessary delays en route incident to mode of travel and periods of necessary temporary duty; that a travel status will commence with departure from the permanent station and will terminate when the member reaches the port to which he has been ordered if the vessel to which he is reporting for duty is already in port. The regulations further provide (paragraph 4200) that per diem is payable for all periods of temporary duty and travel in connection therewith including but not limited to (1) periods of necessary delay awaiting further transportation, (2) periods of delay at ports of embarkation and debarkation in connection with a permanent change of station, and (3) periods of temporary duty directed in a permanent change of station order. Paragraph 4205-5c, Joint Travel Regulations, in effect at the time here involved, sets forth rates applicable to delays incident |