B-127868, MAY 25, 1956

B-127868, MAY 25, 1956

TO MR. H. L. EDMONDSON:

THE HONORABLE WILLIAM F. KNOWLAND, UNITED STATES SENATE, HAS FORWARDED TO US FOR CONSIDERATION YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 29, 1956, TO HIM, TO WHICH IS ATTACHED A COPY OF OUR SETTLEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 3, 1956, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM, Z-1595862, FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES INCURRED BY YOUR WIFE FROM SAN FRANCISCO TO CHERBOURG, FRANCE. ALSO, THE HONORABLE JOHN F. SHELLEY, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HAS REQUESTED THAT YOUR CLAIM BE REVIEWED.

BY LETTER DATED MARCH 9, 1954, NOTIFYING YOU OF YOUR TENTATIVE APPOINTMENT TO THE OVERSEAS POSITION, YOU WERE ADVISED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY REGARDING DEPENDENTS, AS FOLLOWS:

"5. DEPENDENTS AND HOUSEHOLD GOODS. TRANSPORTATION WILL BE PROVIDED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE, BUT DEPENDENTS MAY NOT TRAVEL, NOR MAY HOUSEHOLD GOODS BE SHIPPED CONCURRENTLY WITH THE EMPLOYEE. THE DATE OF THEIR ARRIVAL TO JOIN THE EMPLOYEE DEPENDS UPON HOW SOON ADEQUATE HOUSING IS ARRANGED. THEREFORE, UPON ARRIVAL AT THE DUTY STATION, THE EMPLOYEE SHOULD FILE APPLICATION WITH THE LOCAL OVERSEAS COMMAND REQUESTING THAT HIS DEPENDENTS BE AUTHORIZED TO JOIN HIM; APPROVAL IS USUALLY GRANTED AS SOON AS ADEQUATE QUARTERS ARE LOCATED.

"6. THE OVERSEAS COMMAND THEN REQUESTS THE ADJUTANT GENERAL IN WASHINGTON TO ISSUE APPROPRIATE ORDERS AND ARRANGE TRANSPORTATION. THE MECHANICS ARE CARRIED OUT BY THE U.S. ARMY COMMAND CLOSEST TO THE DEPENDENTS' PLACE OF RESIDENCE WHICH, IN YOUR CASE, IS THE SIXTH ARMY.'

ON MAY 11, 1954, YOUR TRAVEL ORDERS--- LETTER ORDER NO. 30-C-1--- WERE ISSUED CALLING FOR YOUR TRAVEL BY MILITARY SURFACE TRANSPORTATION TO PARIS, FRANCE. ALSO, THOSE ORDERS AUTHORIZED TRAVEL BY RAIL WITHIN THE UNITED STATES AND BY RAIL OR BUS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES. NOTHING WAS SAID IN THOSE ORDERS REGARDING THE TRAVEL OF YOUR DEPENDENT BECAUSE THAT MATTER WAS COVERED BY THE LETTER DATED MARCH 9, 1954, ABOVE.

YOUR TRAVEL ORDERS CALLED FOR YOU TO BE AVAILABLE FOR TRAVEL ON MAY 20, 1954. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT YOU WERE INFORMED VERBALLY BY THE PORT OF EMBARKATION AUTHORITIES AT SAN FRANCISCO THAT THE OFFICIAL WAITING PERIOD FOR DEPENDENT TRAVEL WAS APPROXIMATELY 10 MONTHS. HOWEVER, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY AND THE ARMY AUDIT AGENCY, WITH WHICH YOU WERE EMPLOYED, ESTIMATED THAT THE WAITING PERIOD FOR DEPENDENT TRAVEL WAS FOUR TO SIX MONTHS. BUT THE RECORD SHOWS THAT ON JULY 7, 1954, YOUR WIFE, WITHOUT REGARD TO THE INSTRUCTIONS FURNISHED YOU IN THE LETTER DATED MARCH 9, 1954, QUOTED IN PART ABOVE, LEFT SAN FRANCISCO ON THE FRENCH LINE FREIGHTER "WYOMING," A SHIP OF FOREIGN REGISTRY.

PARAGRAPH 95 OF THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS INCORPORATES THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 901 OF THE MERCHANT MARINE ACT OF 1936, 49 STAT. 2015, TO LIMIT TRAVEL TO SHIPS REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES. OUR OFFICE HAS REPEATEDLY HELD THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 901 ARE MANDATORY AND REQUIRE THE DISALLOWANCE OF ALL TRAVEL EXPENSES ON A FOREIGN VESSEL UNLESS THE NECESSITY THEREFOR CAN BE CONCLUSIVELY SHOWN. NO SUCH NECESSITY HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. YOU CONTEND THAT HAD YOUR DEPENDENT WIFE WAITED ON GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION YOUR MAINTENANCE OF TWO RESIDENCES--- IN SAN FRANCISCO AND PARIS--- WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED. MATTERS OF CONVENIENCE OF THE TRAVELER OR ECONOMY ALONE DO NOT JUSTIFY THE USE OF FOREIGN VESSELS BY DEPENDENTS OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES IN TRAVELING OVERSEAS. SEE, GENERALLY, 18 COMP. GEN. 375; ID. 858; 30 ID. 407; AND 31 ID. 351.

THE RULE IS WELL ESTABLISHED THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS INVOLVED--- NOT THE EMPLOYEE OR HIS DEPENDENT--- HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE THE MODE AND TIME OF TRANSPORTATION UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES SUCH AS EXISTED HERE. WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE, THEREFORE, BUT TO SUSTAIN THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY YOUR DEPENDENT WIFE FOR TRAVEL ON A FOREIGN VESSEL.

IN YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 27, 1955, YOU SAY THAT A PASSPORT FEE OF $10 WAS PAID AND THAT YOU DESIRE TO MAKE CLAIM FOR THAT AMOUNT PLUS AN ADDITIONAL $1 PAID FOR THE CERTIFICATION OF THE PASSPORT, A TOTAL OF $11. IN THAT CONNECTION, YOU ARE ADVISED THAT 22 U.S.C. 214 PROVIDES IN PART THAT NO FEE SHALL BE COLLECTED FOR PASSPORTS ISSUED TO OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED STATES PROCEEDING ABROAD IN THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR OFFICIAL DUTIES, OR TO MEMBERS OF THEIR IMMEDIATE FAMILIES. FURTHER, SECTION 214/A) OF THE SAME TITLE PROVIDES, IN EFFECT, THAT WHENEVER A FEE IS ERRONEOUSLY CHARGED AND PAID FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A PASSPORT TO A PERSON EXEMPTED FROM THE PAYMENT THEREOF BY SECTION 214 THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE IS AUTHORIZED TO MAKE REFUND. ACCORDINGLY, ANY CLAIM FOR REFUND OF SUCH FEES WOULD BE, IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, FOR ADDRESSING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE.

CONCERNING YOUR INQUIRY ABOUT FURTHER ADMINISTRATIVE OR JUDICIAL ACTION UPON YOUR CLAIM REGARDING YOUR WIFE'S TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES, YOU ARE INFORMED THAT UNDER SECTION 304 OF THE BUDGET AND ACCOUNTING ACT, 1921, 42 U.S.C. 20, 24, THE FINAL ACTION OF OUR OFFICE UPON CLAIMS PRESENTED TO IT FOR SETTLEMENT IS BINDING AND CONCLUSIVE UPON THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT, AND THE LAW PROVIDES FOR NO APPEAL FROM SUCH ACTION. HOWEVER, YOU WOULD NOT BE PRECLUDED THEREBY FROM FILING SUIT IN AN APPROPRIATE COURT, IF YOU WISH TO PURSUE SUCH A REMEDY. SEE GENERALLY 28 U.S.C. 1346, ID. 1491, PUBLIC LAW 773, APPROVED JUNE 25, 1948, 62 STAT. 869.