Non-Availibility lodging/letter

[GlassEmpty]

1 minute ago, Bojangles said:

4250 B 6. Lodging receipts are not required, but proof that lodging costs were incurred shall be required. The fixed rate per diem may not be reduced further even if the actual lodging costs incurred are less than the lodging portion of the reduced per diem.

This is EXACTLY what I was saying. A member in our class told them this is "a misinterpretation".

 

2 minutes ago, Bojangles said:

Is this Altus finance telling you this? What they say shouldn't matter anyways. If you are TDY enroute then this will be part of your PCS voucher and will go to Ellsworth for processing. They see so many of these vouchers that I'd hope this still isn't a problem. If this a normal TDY from home station then it'll be your own unit approving this. 

I've been out of the financial services section for a bit so maybe things changed but that was copied from the current JTR.

As this is becoming the standard, they've told him "We'll pay accrual vouchers as such, but your final voucher will be corrected and a debt created". Which made no sense to me, thus you have this post. Regardless, Most people that are I've talked to don't know about this, so they're pouring cash into Crash Pads because they think its use or lose money, even with a Non-A. Some of the individuals are looking to get out of their situations and find cheaper long term rentals.

[GlassEmpty]

10 minutes ago, bennynova said:

the only time that flat rate lodging is allowed (and you keep the difference) is when you are getting a 55% rate (due to being TDY over 180 days)

Wrong. 31-180 days is 75%. Re-read 4250.

[sixpack]

New reg is nothing but a money grab.  I see no advantages to the member.  Still can be required to stay on base and even if no chow hall you only get 75 or 55%.  Off base is no better.

Edited June 10, 2016 by sixpack

[bennynova]

30 minutes ago, GlassEmpty said:

Wrong. 31-180 days is 75%. Re-read 4250.

My example was for OVER 180   Which is 55%.  

 

The 75% rate might be the same (30-180 days)   Is that how long your trip is?  Over 30 days?

   

[bennynova]

On May 31, 2016 at 10:46 PM, Sly716 said:

I'm taking a group tdy out to Nellis for a couple weeks, and having some issues with lodging...  DTS sent us a non-a letter for lodging, but the head of the lodging (who is a civilian contractor) is telling me we have to stay at one of the hotels they have a contract with. I found a hotel we'd rather stay at for the per diem rate (aka not ghetto and full of roaches), but he says it isn't one of their "contracted" hotels so we can't stay there.

 

Any time I've gotten a non-a I've been allowed to stay where I want, the base can just recommend places they have lower rates with. Has that changed? If not, anyone have luck getting around the lodging office?

Again, if you are only going for a couple of weeks (usually means 2).  Then this TdY is less than 30 days.  In that case, only actuall should be reimbursed. 

 

 The long term flat rate lodging only applies to 30-180 days : 75%.   Or 180+ days: 55%

 

for long term tdys, receipts are not needed for matching, but rather proof that costs were incurred

 

but slys TDY seems to be shorter than 30 days

[zmoney]

4 hours ago, sixpack said:

New reg is nothing but a money grab.  I see no advantages to the member.  Still can be required to stay on base and even if no chow hall you only get 75 or 55%.  Off base is no better.

If the member can secure lodging cheaper than the 75% or 55% rate, they keep the money they didn't spend (although it sounds like Altus finance is confused about this).

In the example I gave from the JTR, the member would be "banking" $13.90 a day.  The purpose of flat rate per diem is to create a financial incentive for the member to find cheaper lodging.  This often means entering a lease, which is the reason why a receipt is not necesary under flat rate per diem--you must only certify that lodging costs were actually incurred.

The confusion likely arises because the JTR does not state explicitly that "you keep the difference."  The member (and finance) is left to infer this by the statement "the fixed rate per diem may not be reduced further even if the actual lodging costs incurred are less than the lodging portion of the reduced per diem."

Again this ONLY applies to flat rate per diem TDYs--TDYs in excess of 30 days.

 

Edited June 10, 2016 by zmoney
Spelling and formatting

[bennynova]

agree... flat rate.   in excess of 30 days.

 

  does that apply to the original asker??  "couple of weeks TDY"

 

 

[sixpack]

59 minutes ago, zmoney said:

If the member can secure lodging cheaper than the 75% or 55% rate, they keep the money they didn't spend (although it sounds like Altus finance is confused about this).

In the example I gave from the JTR, the member would be "banking" $13.90 a day.  The purpose of flat rate per diem is to create a financial incentive for the member to find cheaper lodging.  This often means entering a lease, which is  the reason why a receipt is not necesary under flat rate per diem--you must only cerify that lodging costs were actually incurred.

The confusion likely arises because the JTR does not state explicitly that "you keep the difference."  The member (and finance) is left to infer this by the statement "the fixed rate per diem may not be reduced further even if the actual lodging costs incurred are less than the lodging portion of the reduced per diem."

Again this ONLY applies to flat rate per diem TDYs--TDYs in excess of 30 days.

 

Correct, however if lodging is available on base then you will only receive the on base lodging rate.  Also when the chow hall finally opens then you will only get proportional rate for meals.

 

At least that's how I interpret it.  Correct me if i'm wrong.

Edited June 10, 2016 by sixpack

[zmoney]

1 hour ago, sixpack said:

 

Correct, however if lodging is available on base then you will only receive the on base lodging rate.  Also when the chow hall finally opens then you will only get proportional rate for meals.

 

At least that's how I interpret it.  Correct me if i'm wrong.

I think you're right about that... If you are stuck on base, it does hose you pretty good.

[AlltheQuestions]

In regards to the new long-term TDY reg. If you get a non-a and yet still choose to stay in gov't quarters (i.g. navy lodge) are you still subjected to the actual cost of the room or do you get the 75% rate still? I was reading the JTR, and in chapter 2, it talks about gov't quarters being predetermined as unavailable if going to a service school. My question is what cancels out? which portion of the JTR do I go with? the lodge was not on the post and I still have non-a stating that rooms were unavailable. I beleive people are interperting differntly because someone else that stayed in the same place got the 75% rate so they pocketed the difference.

Availability/Non-availability Documentation
1. Availability/non-availability must be documented (see par. 2570).
2. Non-availability documentation is required only for Gov’t Qtrs on (not near) an Installation at which a
member is TDY.
3. The member is not required to check for Gov’t Qtrs availability when TDY to a foreign installation unless
directed by competent authority in the orders.
D. Member Uses Other Lodgings as a Personal Choice. A member:
1. Should use adequate and available Gov’t Qtrs on the U.S. Installation at which assigned TDY.
2. Who uses other lodgings as a personal choice, when adequate Gov’t Qtrs:
a. Are available on that U.S. Installation, or
b. Use is directed on a foreign Installation
is limited to the Gov’t Qtrs lodging reimbursement cost on the Gov’t Installation to which assigned TDY (44
Comp. Gen. 626 (1965)).
E. Per Diem Limitation Not Allowed. Per diem cannot be limited based on nearby Gov’t Qtrs that are not on the
Gov’t Installation, to which the member is assigned TDY, but on another nearby Gov’t Installation, uniformed
facility, or elsewhere.
2565 GOV’T QTRS NOT AVAILABLE
The Services have predetermined that Gov’t Qtrs are not available:
1. When a TDY/delay point is at other than a U.S. Installation (See App A1);
2. When an AO determines that Gov’t Qtrs use would adversely affect mission performance except for:
a. A member attending a service school at a Uniformed Service facility, and
b. An O-7 through O-10 officer who personally determines Qtrs availability;

[faipmafiaofficial]

quick question:

Who/what reg decides what size (# of bedrooms) TLF you are "eligible" for when TDY enroute??

Lackland is trying to stick me, my wife and 8 month old (all on my orders) in a 1 bedroom TLF for 5 months.  Can they do this?

[HossHarris]

Nope. 

Tell them it's unsuitable and ask for a non-A. 

Or, self certify that it's unsuitable and stay where you want. 

There is a lodging afi that may help, also the JTR. 

[faipmafiaofficial]

14 minutes ago, HossHarris said:

Nope. 

Tell them it's unsuitable and ask for a non-A. 

Or, self certify that it's unsuitable and stay where you want. 

There is a lodging afi that may help, also the JTR. 

I already asked for a non - A and was denied by lodging management.  They are out of 2 bedroom TLFs...  The schoolhouse commander has ordered that all students stay in gov't quarters...

Long story short, as of today I have been ordered to stay in a 1 bedroom TLF with both of my dependents.  Because the base hotel manager deemed that "suitable"  What reg justifies this?

 

[HossHarris]

Take it out if the lodging managers hands. Talk to your flt/cc then schoolhouse/cc. They should fix this quickly. It's their reason to exist. 

[faipmafiaofficial]

8 minutes ago, HossHarris said:

Take it out if the lodging managers hands. Talk to your flt/cc then schoolhouse/cc. They should fix this quickly. It's their reason to exist. 

ya i havent conversed with lodging at all...its all been through the chain of command.  They unfortunately have stated that Ill be staying in the available 1 bedroom setup.  Which for many many reasons won't work well for 3 people to include a baby.

Im an O-3 going to C-5M ACIQ for what its worth

[Guest]

ya i havent conversed with lodging at all...its all been through the chain of command.  They unfortunately have stated that Ill be staying in the available 1 bedroom setup.  Which for many many reasons won't work well for 3 people to include a baby.

Im an O-3 going to C-5M ACIQ for what its worth

Is it a pet friendly TLF? If not, buy a goldfish and move off base. Also, what authority does the CC at Kelly have to order you to stay on base? Is there even lodging at Kelly, or are you at Lackland?

Edit to add: Is it an IHG Army/Candlewood/Holiday Inn managed property? I've got a policy letter somewhere saying a non-A is not required to decline utilizing privatized quarters.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[faipmafiaofficial]

11 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:

Is it a pet friendly TLF? If not, buy a goldfish and move off base. Also, what authority does the CC at Kelly have to order you to stay on base? Is there even lodging at Kelly, or are you at Lackland?

Edit to add: Is it an IHG Army/Candlewood/Holiday Inn managed property? I've got a policy letter somewhere saying a non-A is not required to decline utilizing privatized quarters.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lodging is on Lackland and training is at Kelly.  I have no idea what authority he has to order that.  Im looking for some references in the JTR or other regs that approves all of this.  I can't find anything when I search

[jice]

13 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:

 Also, what authority does the CC at Kelly have to order you to stay on base?

This is the crux of the issue. I've seen a lot of folks on this thread say that the CC can order a member to use a particular type of lodging, but what is the legal basis here?

[faipmafiaofficial]

5 minutes ago, jice said:

This is the crux of the issue. I've seen a lot of folks on this thread say that the CC can order a member to use a particular type of lodging, but what is the legal basis here?

all I've ever seen in the JTR is on page O-13 of appendix O... "

However, for training, the training location commander, not the AO, decides if GOV’T QTRS use by a uniformed member is directed and if one of the two M&IE rates based on GOV’T dining facility/mess availability is appropriate. "

The other question is who determines if lodging is suitable?

[HossHarris]

Browse afi 34-135 (I think that's the one). It has Sq ft requirements, etc. 

other notes:

-JTR says if you are TDY to base X with no lodging available, and lodging is available on nearby base Y, then lodging is not available. 

-who's paying your voucher in the end?  If it's not the schoolhouse/cc, then stay where you want and take up the reimbursement part later with your gaining/paying unit. Document the deficiencies well*

-JTR allows you to self-certify that lodging is not available. Again, this usually requires some discussion with the paying unit...but sounds legit in this case. 

*-the cc can still give you a lawful order to stay at place X regardless of JTR authorizations and payments.  If you disobey you can be "punished" but they can't withhold payment  

Bottom ljne: do what's right and makes sense for your family, especially with small kids, and worry about the justification/payment later. Worst case money-wise is on-base lodging rate and no perdiem. Budget around that. 

[Fuzz]

AFI 34-135 is the Lodging AFI unfortunately it doesn't say anything about suitability for accompanied dependents just Table 1.1 which says the minimum is 250 feet of living area with a private bath for officers.

I don't know if a commander has the authority to order you to stay on base. This is the only reference I can find in the AFI:

1.3.1.1. Installation commanders may authorize lodging in facilities not meeting minimum standards for reasons of military necessity, such as contingency operations, natural disasters, emergencies, etc. It is inappropriate to involuntarily lodge duty transient personnel in facilities below minimum adequacy standards solely to reduce temporary duty (TDY) costs.

[Fuzz]

8 minutes ago, HossHarris said:

-JTR says if you are TDY to base X with no lodging available, and lodging is available on nearby base Y, then lodging is not available.

Kelly is part of Lackland now.

[viper154]

For what its worth there is memo out there from the Holloman RPA schoolhouse that allowed married folks to stay off base. They had a similar policy requiring all students to stay in base lodging except the married guys, could try to use it as a president. Just my opinion, If your unit (not the FTU) is paying I would try contacting your unit and tell them the current set up is detrimental to your training, and document it. A call between CCs might go further than trying to lawyer the set up. You start hooking events you have documentation as to why, and might be able to leverage things. (not advocating intentionally hooking rides, but if things don't go well you have ammo for the board/CC meeting) 

[TMILL]

A problem you may run into is your fam being on your TDY orders. They were only on my pcs orders so that could stay at my previous location or move to my new one. I was not entitled to a TLF based on that info according to AFPC and finance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[faipmafiaofficial]

17 hours ago, TMILL said:

A problem you may run into is your fam being on your TDY orders. They were only on my pcs orders so that could stay at my previous location or move to my new one. I was not entitled to a TLF based on that info according to AFPC and finance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's tdy enroute so I only have one set of pcs orders. The tdy portion is simply box 7 of the pcs orders