BNUMBER:  B-271891
DATE:  September 11, 1996
TITLE:  Staff Sergeant Daren L. Pierce, USAF--Dislocation Allowance

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

Matter of:Staff Sergeant Daren L. Pierce, USAF--Dislocation Allowance

File:     B-271891

Date:September 11, 1996

DIGEST

Dislocation Allowance (DLA) is not authorized for an Air Force member 
incident to his move out of his assigned government quarters into 
other assigned quarters because his initial quarters were scheduled 
for renovation.  Although the move was directed by military 
authorities, it did not meet the requirements for DLA prescribed by 
regulation pursuant to statute that the relocation be incident to a 
transfer of duty assignment or an evacuation.  In this case the 
member's reimbursement is limited to certain actual expenses incurred, 
if any, for services considered mandatory for habitation of the 
quarters, such as utility and telephone connection fees, but not 
including the cost of purchase of personal items, such as blinds, 
rugs, and curtains.

DECISION

This is in response to a request for a decision of the Comptroller 
General as to the entitlement of Staff Sergeant Daren L. Pierce, USAF, 
to a dislocation allowance (DLA) incident to his directed move from 
his assigned government quarters to other assigned government quarters 
without a change in permanent duty station.[1]  As explained below, he 
is not entitled to DLA in these circumstances.

BACKGROUND

The submission states that because the family quarters assigned to 
Sergeant Pierce at Mountain Home Air Force Base were scheduled for 
renovation, he was directed to move to other government quarters at 
Mountain Home.  No reassignment of duty station was involved.  The 
Finance Officer states that he received preliminary information 
indicating that a DLA was payable in these circumstances, and 
consequently Sergeant Pierce and several other members were paid DLA 
incident to the change of quarters.  However, a subsequent 
determination on the matter by the Defense Finance and Accounting 
Center (DFAS), Denver Center, stated that under the Joint Federal 
Travel Regulations (JFTR), paragraph U5630B, payment of DLA is not 
permitted in these circumstances. 

The Finance Officer asks whether DLA is authorized for 
government-directed moves from one set of government quarters to 
another in the described circumstances, and he asks several related 
questions. [2] 

ANALYSIS

DLA is a lump-sum allowance equal to the member's basic allowance for 
quarters for 2 months, and it is authorized pursuant to 37 U.S.C.  sec.  
407, under regulations prescribed in the JFTR, Chapter 5, Part G.  The 
purpose of DLA is to partially reimburse a member for miscellaneous 
expenses incurred in relocating his or her household upon a permanent 
change of station (PCS) or an evacuation, and it is payable in 
addition to other PCS allowances.  JFTR paras. U5600 and U5630A. In 
addition to payment incident to a relocation due to a PCS between 
stations widely separated, the regulations provide that a DLA may be 
paid in certain circumstances where the relocation is between quarters 
in proximity to each other.  These latter circumstances involve a PCS 
or transfer of duty assignment; 1. when a member's relocation is 
deemed necessary as a result of a PCS between stations in proximity to 
each other;  2. when the relocation of the household incident to a PCS 
is between places in proximity to each other, whether or not within 
the same city; or  3. when the relocation is necessary due to a 
transfer of duty assignment within the corporate limits of the same 
city.  JFTR, para. U5630B1 and U5630B2.  All of these circumstances in 
which a DLA may be authorized involve a PCS or transfer of duty 
assignment.  A move from one set of quarters to another without such a 
transfer of duty assignment, or not incident to an evacuation, 
although directed by military authority such as in Sergeant Pierce's 
case, does not qualify for DLA.  See 55 Comp. Gen. 932 (1976).  
Accordingly, the determination provided by DFAS that DLA is not 
payable incident to the directed changes in quarters involved in this 
case is correct.

The Finance Officer also asks what reimbursement of expenses is 
authorized in a case such as Sergeant Pierce's when DLA is not 
payable.  In particular he asks about reimbursement for the cost of 
purchasing such items as new curtains and blinds.  In this regard, we 
have held that a member may be reimbursed from Operations and 
Maintenance funds for certain expenses incurred for services which are 
mandatory for the actual habitation of the new quarters, on the basis 
that such expenses are incurred in connection with the proper 
administration of the military base involved in the directed change in 
quarters.  55 Comp. Gen. 932, supra.  See also 52 Comp. Gen. 69 
(1972), to the same effect concerning the directed move of a member's 
house trailer not incident to a PCS.  Such reimbursement, however, is 
not a payment of a lump-sum allowance in the nature of DLA; it is 
reimbursement for the actual costs the member incurred for certain 
services considered mandatory for the habitation of the new quarters, 
such as fees paid for connection of utilities and telephone, but not 
for the purchase of personal items such as blinds, rugs, and curtains.  
52 Comp. Gen. 69, supra; 55 Comp. Gen. 932, supra; and 68 Comp. Gen. 
307 (1989).  We know of no authority which would permit reimbursement 
for purchase of such personal items in a case such as Sergeant 
Pierce's.[3]

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

1. The request for decision was submitted by the Financial Services 
Officer, 366th Comptroller Squadron (ACC), Mountain Home Air Force 
Base, Idaho.

2. We note that this request for decision was not forwarded through 
DFAS prior to submission here, as required by service regulations.  
AFR 177-101, Feb. 15, 1991, para. 11-11.  While ordinarily we seek 
compliance with that procedure so as to have the benefit of DFAS's 
views, in this case the record contains the DFAS determination 
referred to in the submission.

3. To the extent that Sergeant Pierce is determined to be in debt for 
the erroneous DLA payment he received, it may be considered for waiver 
under the provisions of 10 U.S.C.  sec.  2774; and 4 C.F.R. Parts 91-92.