# OR not entertaining TD rates



## Uboa (1 Aug 2017)

Hey guys,
    I had to make a new topic, because, although there are quite a few on claims already, none that I've found can really explain this to me. If any of you people could help me understand, it would be greatly appreciated. This is my current scenario:

I just went on an out-of-country TD, and the OR has given out 5000CAD advances (I know all the issues regarding advances, and didn't touch the money, paying everything out of pocket) and RIGHT before going on the plane, we get our itineraries describing our lodging and meals.

Lodging: military barracks for a time, and hotels for the rest

Meals: no meals provided (mess, ration cards, etc), no cooking facilities provided, and we are to live of of restaurants or buy food ourselves at a mess. (While at hotel there is a continental breakfast)

This seems like a normal TD, however, they included a paper which said we will keep all meal receipts, we will only be reimbursed what we provide and the statutory declarations would not be entertained.

Is this normal? Can an OR just decide not to give out rates? Should we not be entitle to normal rates, regardless of staying in a hotel or military barracks, given that no meals are provided and we were living off the economy? (minus those breakfasts)

If anyone has any insight on this, it would be appreciated, as right now, our chain of command isn't being to helpful. Thanks!


----------



## ModlrMike (1 Aug 2017)

I can't say what the rationale here is. That being said, there is nothing in the Temporary Duty Travel Instructions that prohibits them from asking for receipts. Para 4.08 of the same instructions states: "A member who is reasonably unable to submit a receipt in respect of an expense may submit a declaration in lieu of a receipt." I would point this out to them if they give you grief. The last time I did TD where breakfast was provided by the hotel, they calculated the normal per diem minus the amount that breakfast would account for.  The National Joint Council Travel Directive sets the rates for meals and incidentals [LINK]. Personally, I think they're doing this the hard way, with a great deal more work for them. If they want to sit there and tally every receipt, so be it, but I think taking breakfast off the top is the easier way to go.


----------



## Lumber (1 Aug 2017)

Uboa said:
			
		

> Hey guys,
> I had to make a new topic, because, although there are quite a few on claims already, none that I've found can really explain this to me. If any of you people could help me understand, it would be greatly appreciated. This is my current scenario:
> 
> I just went on an out-of-country TD, and the OR has given out 5000CAD advances (I know all the issues regarding advances, and didn't touch the money, paying everything out of pocket) and RIGHT before going on the plane, we get our itineraries describing our lodging and meals.
> ...



No, they can't just decide not to honour official policy. If you would like to review your entitlements, it's all found in CFTDTIs (CF Temporary Duty Travel Instructions).

Specifically, for out of country TD, it is chapter 8 that applies:



> *8.18 — MEAL ALLOWANCES*
> 
> (1) (Entitlement — Full Day of Duty Travel) Subject to paragraph (4), a member who, for a full day, is on duty travel is entitled — except in respect of any meal that is provided at no expense to the member — to a breakfast, lunch, and dinner allowance.



...



> (5) (Amount) The amounts of the breakfast, lunch, and dinner allowances in respect of a member’s location are:
> 
> (a) in respect of the first 30 days of duty travel, 100% of the rate set out in the NJC Travel Directive for the member’s location at the start of each day; and
> 
> (b) in respect of the 31 and any subsequent day of on duty travel, 75% of the rate set out in the NJC Travel Directive for the member’s location at the start of the day.



So, you can see that nowhere does it states that you'll only be reimbursed based on provided receipts.

In fact, the only time that they ask for receipts for meals is under Chapter 5 : "TRAVEL WITHIN PLACE OF DUTY".


----------



## Uboa (1 Aug 2017)

Thanks for the quick responses.
Some of the guys have gone up to the OR without receipts already, and they got chastised by the clerks for making their job harder my having to do stat decs. It's seems to me that their trying to not honour policies is what's causing that.
I was just not sure if there wasn't some clause somewhere, where you can go on TD and not be entitled to anything "as-per-COs-discretion" or something of the sort.
I think this will have to be a case of 15+ claims grievances.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (1 Aug 2017)

Uboa said:
			
		

> Thanks for the quick responses.
> Some of the guys have gone up to the OR without receipts already, and they got chastised by the clerks for making their job harder my having to do stat decs. It's seems to me that their trying to not honour policies is what's causing that.
> I was just not sure if there wasn't some clause somewhere, where you can go on TD and not be entitled to anything "as-per-COs-discretion" or something of the sort.
> I think this will have to be a case of 15+ claims grievances.



Start with a notice of intent to grieve, quoting the reference above. Hopefully, they can sort it out at the lowest possible level, before this gets to DCBA...and embarrassing to your CO.

I am also OUTCAN, on a deployment, on TD. I get the full meal rate (minus the provided breakfast- totally fair). No receipts required.


----------



## ModlrMike (1 Aug 2017)

Uboa said:
			
		

> Thanks for the quick responses.
> Some of the guys have gone up to the OR without receipts already, and they got chastised by the clerks for making their job harder my having to do stat decs. It's seems to me that their trying to not honour policies is what's causing that.
> I was just not sure if there wasn't some clause somewhere, where you can go on TD and not be entitled to anything "as-per-COs-discretion" or something of the sort.
> I think this will have to be a case of 15+ claims grievances.



Let me guess: your Admin O isn't a Loggie.


----------



## Lumber (1 Aug 2017)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Let me guess: your Admin O isn't a Loggie.



Hey I'm not a Loggie (I'm a warfare loving MARS officer), but I've been given the job of AdminO and as a professional, I've taken it upon myself to know and understand the references, including nuances like the differences in meal claim-ability between chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8.


----------



## ModlrMike (1 Aug 2017)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Hey I'm not a Loggie (I'm a warfare loving MARS officer), but I've been given the job of AdminO and as a professional, I've taken it upon myself to know and understand the references, including nuances like the differences in meal claim-ability between chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8.



No disrespect intended, you clearly are doing what you're supposed to. After over 35 years of service however, my observation holds true more often than not.


----------



## Pusser (1 Aug 2017)

I am a loggie and I've been around a long time.  Compensation and benefits is one of my specialties and I've personally done a lot of international TD.

The only time where receipts are required is if there is no meal rate listed here: http://www.njc-cnm.gc.ca/directive/app_d.php?lang=eng.  So, unless the meal at the location you are going to is marked with an asterisk (*), they should simply give you the rate shown without demanding a receipt.  Check the table.  Even countries where all cities are not listed, there is always an "other" location.  The most common *meals are breakfasts and this is usually in locations where breakfast is traditionally provided with the accommodation (and would, therefore, not be claimable unless you had a compelling reason why you couldn't eat the meal provided).

As an example, if you are going anywhere in Afghanistan, you would need receipts for all meals, but if you were going to Tirana, Albania, you would only need a receipt for breakfast.

To demand receipts when not required is the epitome of institutional dickishness, not to mention incredibly labour intensive.


----------



## Uboa (1 Aug 2017)

Thanks for all the in-depth responses. I think I have a way forward, and the other guys are going to appreciate it too. One note and that random piece of paper they included mentioned getting per diem rates while at hotels(minus breakfast), and having to provide receipts only when staying in barracks. This is even when the meal situation is the same for either (minus breakfasts at hotels, of course). I already know this is utter fabrication, as accommodations and per diem entitlements are two completely separate things (unless of course, there are cooking establishments or meals provided). But yeah, reading all this RIGHT before leaving put a lot of undue stresses on everyone, and is potentially creating a lot of work for our OR. It wasn't a very good decision for any party involved, unfortunately.
Thanks again people!


----------



## SeaKingTacco (2 Aug 2017)

Living in barracks has absolutely nothing to do with with your meal rates. Whether or not you get the full meal rate for your country is entirely dependent on what feeding facilities are provided.

If in your situation, there is a publically funded dining facility and you are provided a meal card, but choose to eat on the economy, you are obviously on your own. But from what you have described, this does not sound like the case.

Pusser (above) got it right.


----------



## Lumber (2 Aug 2017)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> No disrespect intended, you clearly are doing what you're supposed to. After over 35 years of service however, my observation holds true more often than not.



None taken! I was just standing up for us non-loggies.


----------



## captloadie (2 Aug 2017)

Before everyone gets bent out of shape and submits their NOI's, did anyone ask the reason they implemented this requirement to provide receipts for meals while staying in barracks? I can think of one very specific reason: The CFTDI states in Chap 5 that rations shall be used whenever available. Perhaps the rations provided at the base were not considered up to standard, therefore the chain of command deemed it acceptable for members to eat at an establishment of their choice and would be reimbursed actual and reasonable expenses. Getting the receipts shows that they weren't just trying to put money in the pocket of the troops. I highly doubt the clerks or any competent person acting as the Admin O, would choose to go the receipt route otherwise.

Fighting this could lead to the next group of guys being ordered to eat on base, in a prearranged payment agreement with the host nation chow hall. Think about that before submitting the NOI.


----------



## Lumber (2 Aug 2017)

Uboa said:
			
		

> Thanks for all the in-depth responses. I think I have a way forward, and the other guys are going to appreciate it too. One note and that random piece of paper they included mentioned getting per diem rates while at hotels(minus breakfast),* and having to provide receipts only when staying in barracks. *This is even when the meal situation is the same for either (minus breakfasts at hotels, of course). I already know this is utter fabrication, as accommodations and per diem entitlements are two completely separate things (unless of course, there are cooking establishments or meals provided). But yeah, reading all this RIGHT before leaving put a lot of undue stresses on everyone, and is potentially creating a lot of work for our OR. It wasn't a very good decision for any party involved, unfortunately.
> Thanks again people!





			
				Pusser said:
			
		

> I am a loggie and I've been around a long time.  Compensation and benefits is one of my specialties and I've personally done a lot of international TD.



Pusser, I think you can answer a question I have on the highlighted bit.

When a member is in shacks and on ration strength, but has to eat on the economy for valid reasons, do they have to provide a receipt (or stat dec), and get reimbursed only that amount, or do they just get the meal rate? Does it vary depending on the chapter of travel?


----------



## Pusser (2 Aug 2017)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Pusser, I think you can answer a question I have on the highlighted bit.
> 
> When a member is in shacks and on ration strength, but has to eat on the economy for valid reasons, do they have to provide a receipt (or stat dec), and get reimbursed only that amount, or do they just get the meal rate? Does it vary depending on the chapter of travel?



In this particular case, yes.  The reference is one of the notes to para 4 of CFAO 36-14 (this CFAO is @#$%! complicated) .  The gist of it is that when a member is entitled to rations at public expense or is on ration strength and cannot be provided with a meal from a public source (e.g. he can't make it to the mess), then he is entitled to be reimbursed actual and reasonable expenses for the meal.  You need a receipt to prove the "actual" expense and the "reasonable" part is the TB approved rate for that meal at that location.  A good example would be a member who is tasked away from the base over lunch hour (and for some reason can't get a box lunch) and can't make it back in time for lunch - he goes to Subway, gets lunch and gets reimbursed what he paid for it.  However, if the same guy chooses to spend the day at the zoo on Saturday and so doesn't go to the mess for lunch, he's on his own dime for that (although, he should be able to request and draw a box lunch).


----------



## Uboa (2 Aug 2017)

captloadie said:
			
		

> Before everyone gets bent out of shape and submits their NOI's, did anyone ask the reason they implemented this requirement to provide receipts for meals while staying in barracks? I can think of one very specific reason: The CFTDI states in Chap 5 that rations shall be used whenever available. Perhaps the rations provided at the base were not considered up to standard, therefore the chain of command deemed it acceptable for members to eat at an establishment of their choice and would be reimbursed actual and reasonable expenses. Getting the receipts shows that they weren't just trying to put money in the pocket of the troops. I highly doubt the clerks or any competent person acting as the Admin O, would choose to go the receipt route otherwise.
> 
> Fighting this could lead to the next group of guys being ordered to eat on base, in a prearranged payment agreement with the host nation chow hall. Think about that before submitting the NOI.



Not really. The reason I got was that the det CO wanted to try something new. that said, the local mess was actually very good. but they gave us the option to eat there or in a commercial establishment. Being ordered to eat on base would have been better, as people are (theoretically, according to our or) out of money since they lost receipts.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (2 Aug 2017)

Uboa said:
			
		

> Not really. The reason I got was that the det CO wanted to try something new. that said, the local mess was actually very good. but they gave us the option to eat there or in a commercial establishment. Being ordered to eat on base would have been better, as people are (theoretically, according to our or) out of money since they lost receipts.



What you have just said is....puzzling, to say the least.

Publically funded Rations either are/are not provided on deployments. There is no (that I am aware of) third way where you get a choice is the matter (to eat in the mess or just blow that off and claim the meal).

I am now confused by what you have posted.


----------



## kev994 (2 Aug 2017)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> What you have just said is....puzzling, to say the least.
> 
> Publically funded Rations either are/are not provided on deployments. There is no (that I am aware of) third way where you get a choice is the matter (to eat in the mess or just blow that off and claim the meal).
> 
> I am now confused by what you have posted.


Total speculation, but in 'Mercia the rations are not at public expense, you need to pay the price of the raw goods, so it's comically cheap but not technically free.


----------



## SupersonicMax (2 Aug 2017)

kev994 said:
			
		

> Total speculation, but in 'Mercia the rations are not at public expense, you need to pay the price of the raw goods, so it's comically cheap but not technically free.



Having been on several TDs at US bases, there was sometimes a contract in place that allowed us to eat there, as if we were on ration strenght.  If we planned or flew over a meal period, we were reimbursed actual and reasonable expenses.

When there was no contract in place, we would get full meal allowance.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (3 Aug 2017)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Having been on several TDs at US bases, there was sometimes a contract in place that allowed us to eat there, as if we were on ration strenght.  If we planned or flew over a meal period, we were reimbursed actual and reasonable expenses.
> 
> When there was no contract in place, we would get full meal allowance.



I have been in similar situations.


----------



## Pusser (3 Aug 2017)

Uboa said:
			
		

> Not really. The reason I got was that the det CO wanted to try something new. that said, the local mess was actually very good. but they gave us the option to eat there or in a commercial establishment. Being ordered to eat on base would have been better, as people are (theoretically, according to our or) out of money since they lost receipts.



The picture is starting to become more clear.  The issue can be broken down into two possible scenarios:

1) Is there an arrangement in place whereby the foreign base provides meals and accommodations to CAF personnel under these circumstances?  It doesn't matter whether the foreign military provides these for free or the CAF pays a single bill.  In this scenario, R&Q are considered to be provided to the member and there is no entitlement to claim for any meals unless, there is a compelling reason that the member is unable to make it to the mess (I explained how this works above and yes, receipts would be required).  Interestingly, individuals cannot "opt out" of this if they feel like it, so if the CO is giving folks the option to eat out and claim, he actually has no authority to do this and folks could be in for a lot of grief if this gets picked up in an audit (and claims like this draw special attention during audits...).  If this is the case, then the OR is asking for receipts in order to do something they're not allowed to do - and creating a paper trail...

2)  The other scenario is one where the CAF members are required to pay themselves for meals in the mess (i.e. rations are technically not provided).  In this case, the member may claim the appropriate full meal rate for each meal they were at that location, regardless of what they actually paid and no receipts would be required.


----------



## Uboa (15 Aug 2017)

Pusser said:
			
		

> 2)  The other scenario is one where the CAF members are required to pay themselves for meals in the mess (i.e. rations are technically not provided).  In this case, the member may claim the appropriate full meal rate for each meal they were at that location, regardless of what they actually paid and no receipts would be required.



Hey, sorry for dragging this out again, but our OR is referencing a few CFTDTIs, mainly 5.19 on meals. It states rations should be used when available, however, can it really be justified that they weren't provided if we had to pay for them ourselves? Is it considered a "subsidized government facility"? They are basically saying that, whether they were paid for in advance, or the member pays for it themselves, it doesn't matter and amounts to the same thing. This would be a serious blow to most of us who elected to eat off base.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (15 Aug 2017)

This Redress of Grievance decision is probably applicable to your situation, though you may not like what it says.

https://www.canada.ca/en/military-grievances-external-review/services/case-summaries/case-2015-003.html


> # 2015-003 - Meal Expenses, Meal Purchased While on TD at a Foreign Military Base, Temporary Duty Benefits
> 
> Case Summary
> 
> ...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (15 Aug 2017)

Uboa said:
			
		

> Hey, sorry for dragging this out again, but our OR is referencing a few CFTDTIs, mainly 5.19 on meals. It states rations should be used when available, however, can it really be justified that they weren't provided if we had to pay for them ourselves? Is it considered a "subsidized government facility"? They are basically saying that, whether they were paid for in advance, or the member pays for it themselves, it doesn't matter and amounts to the same thing. This would be a serious blow to most of us who elected to eat off base.



Was there any info provided on this pre-deployment...Joining Instructions, etc?  It's usually part of our pre-trip admin to determine what meals, etc are or are not covered and our HRAs are very proactive at pointing out if we are in a hotel that has breakfast included, if/when receipts are required, etc.  There is also a CJOC Admin Instruction if it was of those type of away trips... :2c:.


----------



## Uboa (15 Aug 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Was there any info provided on this pre-deployment...Joining Instructions, etc?  It's usually part of our pre-trip admin to determine what meals, etc are or are not covered and our HRAs are very proactive at pointing out if we are in a hotel that has breakfast included, if/when receipts are required, etc.  There is also a CJOC Admin Instruction if it was of those type of away trips... :2c:.



Not really, it was pretty vague, as they didn't really have any idea what we were going into. They actually pre-emptively advanced us 120% of what a full per-diem TD would give us, including hotel costs. so best case scenario, we owe back 1100CAD, and worst case scenario, we owe back 4000CAD, since most of us will lose all our meals.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (15 Aug 2017)

Uboa said:
			
		

> Hey guys,
> I had to make a new topic, because, although there are quite a few on claims already, none that I've found can really explain this to me. If any of you people could help me understand, it would be greatly appreciated. This is my current scenario:
> 
> I just went on an out-of-country TD, and the OR has given out 5000CAD advances (I know all the issues regarding advances, and didn't touch the money, paying everything out of pocket) and RIGHT before going on the plane, we get our itineraries describing our lodging and meals.
> ...



But there was direction given from the same OR wasn't there...the stuff in yellow above?  Now they are saying *oops we f$$ked that one up and you don't get the money we told you we would reimburse*...or am I missing something.  I know the CFTDI says what it says but...


----------



## SupersonicMax (15 Aug 2017)

Uboa said:
			
		

> Hey, sorry for dragging this out again, but our OR is referencing a few CFTDTIs, mainly 5.19 on meals. It states rations should be used when available, however, can it really be justified that they weren't provided if we had to pay for them ourselves? Is it considered a "subsidized government facility"? They are basically saying that, whether they were paid for in advance, or the member pays for it themselves, it doesn't matter and amounts to the same thing. This would be a serious blow to most of us who elected to eat off base.



You may want to remind them that Chapter 5 has to do with travel within the place of duty.  They should be referencing to Chapter 7, specifically 7.18



> (Entitlement - Full Day of Duty Travel) Subject to paragraph (4), a member who, for a full day, is on duty travel is entitled - except in respect of any meal that is provided at no expense to the member - to a breakfast, lunch, and dinner allowance.


----------



## SupersonicMax (15 Aug 2017)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> This Redress of Grievance decision is probably applicable to your situation, though you may not like what it says.
> 
> https://www.canada.ca/en/military-grievances-external-review/services/case-summaries/case-2015-003.html



Not sure this decision would stand in court. FJAG probably has more insight though.

The legal definition of "incuring cost" is:

incur costs(verb) acknowledge the costs, answer for, assume liability for, be answerable for, be liable for, be responsible for, bear the expense, disburse, expend, lay out for, outlay, pay the costs.

As soon as you pay for something, you become liable for the expense.

Furthermore, the decision could be ground for asking everyone to provide receipts (in any circumstance) vs being entitled to the meal rates. I am pretty sure this isn't the intent of the policy.


----------



## Lumber (16 Aug 2017)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Not sure this decision would stand in court. FJAG probably has more insight though.
> 
> The legal definition of "incuring cost" is:
> 
> ...



I'm amazed that the CDS didn't agree with the committee. These organizations go through a long thought out process to come to these decision. The CO isn't a grievance expert; he's not even a benefits expert. How does he just tell the committee, "nah, you're wrong; f*kk this guy".


----------



## Uboa (16 Aug 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> But there was direction given from the same OR wasn't there...the stuff in yellow above?  Now they are saying *oops we f$$ked that one up and you don't get the money we told you we would reimburse*...or am I missing something.  I know the CFTDI says what it says but...



There was the included "cookie-cutter" sheet that says rations will be used, however, right before boarding, we had a Q&A with our Maj, and when asked where we could eat, he said anywhere, just keep your receipts. It's all very hodgepodge so far, and finding actual proper directive is pretty challenging so far. We aren't setting out to take advantage of the system, but we don't want to get screwed over either.



			
				SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> You may want to remind them that Chapter 5 has to do with travel within the place of duty.  They should be referencing to Chapter 7, specifically 7.18



Yeah, that's what we figured, but their reference is a FAQ that asks a question related to foreign duty, and the answer refers to 5.19 for "place of duty". I'll have to find that again, because it was literally just a photocopied monochrome sheet with missing headers. Hardly something I'd call official. Like you said, I'm pretty sure chapter * is what we need.


----------



## Uboa (23 Aug 2017)

Pusser said:
			
		

> The picture is starting to become more clear.  The issue can be broken down into two possible scenarios:
> 
> 1) Is there an arrangement in place whereby the foreign base provides meals and accommodations to CAF personnel under these circumstances?  It doesn't matter whether the foreign military provides these for free or the CAF pays a single bill.  In this scenario, R&Q are considered to be provided to the member and there is no entitlement to claim for any meals unless, there is a compelling reason that the member is unable to make it to the mess (I explained how this works above and yes, receipts would be required).  Interestingly, individuals cannot "opt out" of this if they feel like it, so if the CO is giving folks the option to eat out and claim, he actually has no authority to do this and folks could be in for a lot of grief if this gets picked up in an audit (and claims like this draw special attention during audits...).  If this is the case, then the OR is asking for receipts in order to do something they're not allowed to do - and creating a paper trail...
> 
> 2)  The other scenario is one where the CAF members are required to pay themselves for meals in the mess (i.e. rations are technically not provided).  In this case, the member may claim the appropriate full meal rate for each meal they were at that location, regardless of what they actually paid and no receipts would be required.



Hey again,
       Can you provide a reference (I know this is probably annoying, as it's obvious in Chapter 8 of the CFDTDI) for these? Or tell me where I could find them? Our major originally told us we could visit neighbouring cities during weekends and claim meals (with receipts, but this doesn't make sense either), but now our SOR is only entertaining receipts from the mess (even though, like said previously, there was no established contract and we had to pay for ourselves). Our CoC isn't too keen on helping us out.

Thanks again.


----------



## captloadie (23 Aug 2017)

It sounds like the OR is between a rock and a hard place. They actually are trying to help the members by exploiting the grey area in the rules, but aren't being helped by all the "direction" that was given. Here is how I see it:
1) The major who gave the directions obviously had no idea what the policies are. Not necessarily his fault, but he should have said "I'll check, and get back to you", rather than eat wherever you want and keep your receipts.
2) Members were told to keep their receipts. It seems one of the issues is that members want to provide a stat dec because they lost their receipts. Is this really the ORs fault? That being said, I would probably reimburse members the mess rate for those meals they don't have proof for, unless it turns out the members lost all the Sunday morning breakfast receipts or other obvious attempts to defraud the CAF.

We have gotten away from staying on bases (Canadian and foreign) and from being forced to eat at the gov't provided facilities. As for the whole "being provided a meal vs. paying it yourself" argument, members are never going to win it when they eat at a gov't provided facility, nor should they. Why should we pay someone $45 for a meal we know only cost $12, and especially if they are told to eat at the facility. I know this isn't the case here, and I believe that the members should be reimbursed for all meals they can prove they have receipts for, and the mess rates for everything else.


----------



## Pusser (23 Aug 2017)

Uboa said:
			
		

> Hey again,
> Can you provide a reference (I know this is probably annoying, as it's obvious in Chapter 8 of the CFDTDI) for these? Or tell me where I could find them? Our major originally told us we could visit neighbouring cities during weekends and claim meals (with receipts, but this doesn't make sense either), but now our SOR is only entertaining receipts from the mess (even though, like said previously, there was no established contract and we had to pay for ourselves). Our CoC isn't too keen on helping us out.
> 
> Thanks again.



CFAO 36-14 (Entitlement to Meals and Public Rations)
CFTDI

The big question is whether rations were provided.  If rations were provided, then you must provide proof of a compelling reason as to why you couldn't eat them before you can be reimbursed "actual and reasonable" costs.  It could be argued that rations were provided even if you had to pay out of pocket at the time in order to be reimbursed later.  If that's the case though, I would be inclined to simply pay everyone the cost of three meals a day at the dining facility, times the number of days - I would likely clear this through DCBA and attach a letter from the CO on a bulk claim.  Receipts seem kind of pointless in this case.  Keep in mind that, "because I felt like a change and ate downtown that night," is not a compelling reason for reimbursement.

If rations were definitely not provided, then the CFTDI come into play and the TB approved rates for reimbursement apply.  Receipts should not be required unless the NJC website says so.


----------



## Uboa (23 Aug 2017)

Pusser said:
			
		

> CFAO 36-14 (Entitlement to Meals and Public Rations)
> CFTDI
> 
> The big question is whether rations were provided.  If rations were provided, then you must provide proof of a compelling reason as to why you couldn't eat them before you can be reimbursed "actual and reasonable" costs.  It could be argued that rations were provided even if you had to pay out of pocket at the time in order to be reimbursed later.  If that's the case though, I would be inclined to simply pay everyone the cost of three meals a day at the dining facility, times the number of days - I would likely clear this through DCBA and attach a letter from the CO on a bulk claim.  Receipts seem kind of pointless in this case.  Keep in mind that, "because I felt like a change and ate downtown that night," is not a compelling reason for reimbursement.
> ...



Thanks,
     At that point though, how can you prove the meals were provided or not? Meals WERE available and a dining establishment, we went there sometimes, but since we were told by our DETCO at the start that any location was good, there would be no issues (given this, and the fact that they advanced us 100% full per diem, not even the standard 80%, but actually even more then would be necessary for all lodging, car rental, AND full perr diem meals for every single day, we assumed they'd actually be entertaining the CFDTDI). Like you said, I think the big issue right now is meals provided. It seems like they can pretty much ALWAYS says meals were provided, even without contracts with foreign lodger units? I don't really ming one way or another, or at least I wouldn't, had this been established at the start, and false information hadn't been given to us by a position of authority.
Thanks for your prompt ersponse though   [


----------



## ModlrMike (23 Aug 2017)

Available =/= provided.

Provided in the context of CFTDI means that the Crown directly absorbed the cost of the meals with no encumbrance on the member, other than perhaps some local administration (ration control etc).


----------

