[Appeal Concerning Denial of Reimbursement for Overseas Travel]

A civilian Navy employee appealed a Claims Group denial of his claim for reimbursement of overseas travel on a foreign air carrier when returning to the United States after performing temporary duty. The claimant contended that there was no U.S. air carrier available as part of the return route that he selected which justified use of a foreign air carrier. His travel orders indicated that both commercial and Government air were authorized. While the claimant was at his first temporary duty station, he received orders to report to another temporary duty station. The Navy authorized the claimant's orders for indirect travel for leave purposes on his return from the second duty station to the United States. The claimant contended that his travel orders directed him to return to his duty station by commercial air. From this premise he further argued that the certificate he executed describing the actual facts concerning the travel justified the use of the foreign air carrier along the directed route, based upon applicable Fly America principles. GAO held that, since the Military Airlift Command (MAC) full-plane charter services need not be considered as an available U.S. air carrier under the Fly America Act, his use of a foreign air carrier may be justified in the usual manner using only available commercial flights. However, under his travel orders and applicable regulation, reimbursement for return travel was limited to the constructive MAC cost. Accordingly, the claim was disallowed and the claimant was properly required to refund the amount in question.