BNUMBER:  B-265913
DATE:  February 26, 1996
TITLE:  Commander Kathy R. Moore, USN

**********************************************************************

Matter of:Commander Kathy R. Moore, USN

File:     B-265913

Date:February 26, 1996

DIGEST

Member is not entitled to per diem for temporary duty performed at 
location which became permanent duty station following completion of 
temporary duty because change of duty station is effective upon 
receipt of order and therefore, temporary duty was not performed in a 
travel status away from the permanent duty station.  However, member 
is entitled to per diem for temporary duty performed at old duty 
station following temporary duty at new duty station.

DECISION

The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), Columbus Center 
requests a decision concerning the claim of Commander Kathy R. Moore, 
USN, for per diem and rental car expenses in connection with temporary 
duty she performed from June 5 to 19, 1994, at the Personnel Support 
Activity, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Commander Moore was issued permanent change-of-station orders to move 
her duty station from OPNAV, Arlington, Virginia, to the Personnel 
Support Activity, New Orleans, Louisiana, with three temporary duty 
(TDY) assignments before ultimately reporting to New Orleans.  The 
first TDY was at her ultimate duty station in New Orleans from June 5 
through 19, 1994.  Here she resided in Bachelor Officer Quarters, ate 
out on the economy and rented a car because of the lack of government 
transportation.  From June 20 through 24, 1994, she attended a class 
at Virginia Beach, Virginia.  Her final TDY was in Arlington, 
Virginia, at the Bureau of Naval Personnel from June 24 until 29, 
1994.  On July 2, 1994, she returned to New Orleans and her new duty 
station with her dependents who, during the series of TDYs, remained 
at her residence in Arlington.  Commander Moore only received per diem 
for the temporary duty at Virginia Beach, Virginia.

Commander Moore's claim for per diem and rental car expenses was 
denied for the period of temporary duty in New Orleans because a 
member is not entitled to per diem for temporary duty performed within 
the limits of the member's permanent duty station.  See Volume 1, 
Joint Travel Regulation para. U4201-F.  When a member is ordered to 
report for permanent duty at a station following completion of 
temporary duty at the same place, that station becomes his or her 
permanent station upon receipt of such orders.  Lieutenant Colonel 
Paul N. Driggers, USAF, B-216465, May 22, 1985.

Therefore, the denial of the claim was proper, especially in view of 
the fact that Commander Moore assumed command of the Personnel Support 
Activity, New Orleans, on June 17, 1994, while she was on temporary 
duty there.

However, since New Orleans became her permanent duty station upon 
receipt of the orders directing the permanent change of station and 
the subsequent three temporary duty assignments, she should be 
entitled to per diem from June 24 until 29, 1994, when she performed 
temporary duty in Arlington, Virginia, because she was in a travel 
status away from her permanent duty station, New Orleans.

/s/Seymour Efros
for Robert P. Murphy
General Counsel