B-145533, SEP. 25, 1961
Highlights
THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE FULLY SET FORTH IN OUR DECISION OF JUNE 16. EISENBERG PLANNED HER TRIP OVER THE INDIRECT ROUTE ONLY AFTER BEING ADVISED THAT THIS WAS PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE REGULATIONS THEN IN EFFECT.'. THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS PROVIDE THAT WHEN TRAVEL IS PERFORMED BY OTHER THAN A USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE. THE MOST DIRECT AND USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE FOR THE TRAVEL AUTHORIZED WOULD HAVE BEEN VIA LOS ANGELES. WHERE AN AMERICAN VESSEL WOULD HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE. WHICH WAS PERFORMED PARTIALLY ON VESSELS OF FOREIGN REGISTRY. WAS FOR THE PERSONAL CONVENIENCE OF THE DEPENDENT TO VISIT HER RELATIVES. CONCERNING YOUR CONTENTION THAT A TRANSPORTATION REQUEST WAS ISSUED BY THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICE OF THE EMBASSY IN MEXICO CITY AUTHORIZING TRAVEL ON A FOREIGN VESSEL OVER AN INDIRECT ROUTE.
B-145533, SEP. 25, 1961
TO MR. DONALD K. GRAHAM:
THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 22, 1961, CONCERNING THE INDEBTEDNESS OF MR. ROBERT EISENBERG TO THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EXCESS COST OF THE TRANSPORTATION OF HIS WIFE IN TRAVELING FROM MEXICO CITY, MEXICO, TO VIENTIANE, LAOS.
THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE FULLY SET FORTH IN OUR DECISION OF JUNE 16, 1961, TO MR. ROBERT EISENBERG AND NEED NOT BE REPEATED HERE.
YOU SAY IN YOUR LETTER THAT "MRS. EISENBERG PLANNED HER TRIP OVER THE INDIRECT ROUTE ONLY AFTER BEING ADVISED THAT THIS WAS PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE REGULATIONS THEN IN EFFECT.' YOU DO NOT GIVE A CITATION TO THE REGULATION REFERRED TO. MR. EISENBERG'S AMENDED TRAVEL ORDER DATED FEBRUARY 19, 1959, WHICH WOULD CONTROL THE TRAVEL IN QUESTION, STATES "FAMILY AUTHORIZED TO TRAVEL FROM MEXICO, D.F., MEXICO TO VIENTIANE, LAOS.' THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS PROVIDE THAT WHEN TRAVEL IS PERFORMED BY OTHER THAN A USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE, REIMBURSEMENT SHALL BE LIMITED TO COST BY A USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE. SEE I FOREIGN SERVICE MANUAL III 131.2, 137.23, 180 FSTR 1.2R AND 3.5. ALSO SEE I FOREIGN SERVICE MANUAL III 137.21. THE MOST DIRECT AND USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE FOR THE TRAVEL AUTHORIZED WOULD HAVE BEEN VIA LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, WHERE AN AMERICAN VESSEL WOULD HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE. THE ACTUAL TRAVEL PERFORMED BY AN INDIRECT ROUTE, WHICH WAS PERFORMED PARTIALLY ON VESSELS OF FOREIGN REGISTRY, WAS FOR THE PERSONAL CONVENIENCE OF THE DEPENDENT TO VISIT HER RELATIVES.
CONCERNING YOUR CONTENTION THAT A TRANSPORTATION REQUEST WAS ISSUED BY THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICE OF THE EMBASSY IN MEXICO CITY AUTHORIZING TRAVEL ON A FOREIGN VESSEL OVER AN INDIRECT ROUTE, IT MAY BE STATED THAT THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CORRECT PERFORMANCE OF OFFICIAL TRAVEL AND PAYMENT OF ANY CHARGES INCURRED THROUGH FAILURE TO OBSERVE THE APPLICABLE STATUTES OR REGULATIONS RESTS WITH THE TRAVELER REGARDLESS OF WHO MAY HAVE ASSISTED IN MAKING TRAVEL OR TRANSPORTATION ARRANGEMENTS. I FOREIGN SERVICE MANUAL III 131.3.
YOU CONTEND THAT THE AVAILABILITY OF AN AMERICAN SHIP OVER THE INDIRECT ROUTE USED IS THE ESSENTIAL FACTOR. OUR OFFICE CONSISTENTLY HAS HELD THAT THE AVAILABILITY OF A SHIP OF AMERICAN REGISTRY OVER THE DIRECT ROUTE IS CONTROLLING UNDER SECTION 901 OF THE MERCHANT MARINE ACT OF 1936, 46 U.S.C. 1241 (A). 39 COMP. GEN. 642, 30 ID. 407; 11 ID. 4; 9 ID. 210.
SINCE A VESSEL OF AMERICAN REGISTRY WAS AVAILABLE IF MR. EISENBERG'S WIFE HAD TRAVELED BY A DIRECT ROUTE TO VIENTIANE, WE MUST SUSTAIN THE ACTION TAKEN IN OUR DECISION OF JUNE 16, 1961, B-145533, TO MR. EISENBERG.
CONCERNING YOUR REQUEST THAT MR. EISENBERG BE GRANTED A HEARING IN THE MATTER, IT MAY BE STATED THAT ANY ACTION TAKEN BY OUR OFFICE IS BASED ON THE WRITTEN RECORD BEFORE US. HOWEVER, MR. EISENBERG MAY CALL AT OUR OFFICE AT ANY TIME BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 9:00 A.M., AND 4:00 P.M., MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, TO DISCUSS HIS CASE IF HE SO DESIRES.