Skip to main content

B-130583 O/M, May 8, 1957

B-130583 O/M May 08, 1957
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

PRECIS UNAVAILABLE Comptroller General: Herewith are the papers pertaining to claim TK-549894. The claim was transmitted to our Office for settlement by the Department of State. Section 901 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 (49 Stat. 2015) is forwarded for your consideration of the information furnished in the attached correspondence.". There is attached to the file copy of letter of the Freight Clerk. It appears from the file that the charges assessed for ocean transportation are reasonable. There is attached to the file copy of Authorization of Official Travel. Any officer or employee of the United States traveling on official business overseas or to or from any of the possessions of the United States shall travel and transport his personal effects on ships are available unless the necessity of his mission requires the use of a ship under a foreign flag: Provided.

View Decision

B-130583 O/M, May 8, 1957

PRECIS UNAVAILABLE

Comptroller General:

Herewith are the papers pertaining to claim TK-549894, of the American Express Company, for $39.41, alleged to be due for the transportation of 1 box or ammunition, 58 kilos, 128 pounds, from Bad Godesberg, Germany, consigned to Glenn J. Reinsel, Clarion, Pennsylvania, during August 1953. The shipment moved from Bremen, to New York aboard the M. S. "Havfalk" a foreign flag vessel, and the claim was transmitted to our Office for settlement by the Department of State, Division of Finance, under date of January 10, 1955, with the following special instructions:

"To be paid in the amount found to be the legal obligation of the Government. The attached voucher covering a shipment via foreign flag vessel, reference I FSM III 131.41, section 901 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 (49 Stat. 2015) is forwarded for your consideration of the information furnished in the attached correspondence."

There is attached to the file copy of letter of the Freight Clerk, American Express Company, Inc., Bad Godesberg, dated June 22, 1954, stating the reasons for using a foreign flag vessel. It appears from the file that the charges assessed for ocean transportation are reasonable.

There is attached to the file copy of Authorization of Official Travel, Authorization No. H-H-23, dated August 24, 1953, authorizing travel at Government expense, of Glenn J. Reinsel, his wife and daughter, and his effects and private automobile, from Bonn/Bad Godesberg, Germany, to Denver, Colorado. Section 901 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, 59 Stat. 2015, provides:

"Sec. 901. Any officer or employee of the United States traveling on official business overseas or to or from any of the possessions of the United States shall travel and transport his personal effects on ships are available unless the necessity of his mission requires the use of a ship under a foreign flag: Provided, That the Comptroller General of the United States shall not credit any allowance for travel or shipping expenses incurred on a foreign ship in the absence of satisfactory proof of the necessity therefor."

The term "household goods" means personal effects and property need or to be used in a dwelling when a part of the equipment or supply of such dwelling. See 17 M.C.C. 467-505. The shipment here concerned consisted of one box of ammunition weighing 128 pounds, which was consigned to Glenn J. Reinsel, at Clairon, Pennsylvania, and although the need of a foreign vessel may be considered permissible in this case, the question arises whether the subject claim is a proper charge against public funds.

The matter is submitted for your consideration and instructions.

Enclosure:

Director, Transportation Division:

Returned. The American Express Company claims $39.41 alleged to be due for the transportation of a 128-pound box of ammunition from Bad Godesberg, Germany, to Clarion, Pennsylvania, in connection with the return travel of a foreign service employee and his family at Government expense, as provided by authorization No. H-H-23, dated August 24, 1953.

The Foreign Service Act of 1946, 60 Stat. 999, 1026, 22 U.S.C. 801, 1136, authorizes the Secretary of State to pay, under such regulations as he may prescribe, the cost of transporting the furniture and household and personal effects of an officer or employee of the foreign service to his successive posts of duty and, on the termination of his services, to the place where he will reside. In the regulations promulgated by the Secretary pursuant to this statute, "effects" are defined as: "Furniture, household goods, and personal effects for use of an employee and his family."

The terms "household goods or effects" and "personal effects" have been defined in several decisions of our Office and by the courts. Although definitions have differed depending upon the context in which the terms were used, as generally understood "household goods or effects" refer to furniture and furnishings, or equipment-- articles of a permanent nature-- used in about a place of residence for the comfort and accommodation of the members of a family. See 27 Comp.Gen. 760; 1 Comp.Gen. 679; B-120653, November 22, 1955; B-88687, December 29, 1949; and B-39498, February 4, 1944. The term "personal effects" refers to such tangible personal property as is worn or carried about the person, and is personally used by and associated with the person. See 27 Comp.Gen. 760; B-120653, November 22, 1955.

There is no indication that, as used in the Foreign Service Act of 1946, these terms are intended to have other than their ordinary meaning. The regulations promulgated by the Secretary of State do not and cannot extend the meaning to include other than the restricted types of personal property provided for in the act. See 33 Comp.Gen. 61. As ordinarily understood, therefore, and in the absence of special considerations, it does not appear that 128 pounds of ammunition would be considered to be furniture, household goods, or personal effects, and, consequently, there is no legal authority for charging to public funds the cost of this transportation.

Accordingly, the claim of the American Express Company should be disallowed.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs