A-31179, APRIL 7, 1930, 9 COMP. GEN. 439

A-31179: Apr 7, 1930

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

WHERE THERE IS A DELAY OF MORE THAN 60 DAYS. SUCH INCREASED COST SHOULD BE COLLECTED WHEN THE TRANSPORTATION IS ISSUED. COST OF TRANSPORTATION (HALF FARE) OF HIS CHILD WHICH BECAME FIVE YEARS OLD AFTER HIS CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS BECAME EFFECTIVE AND BEFORE TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED. FREEMAN WAS DETACHED FROM DUTY AT THE RECEIVING SHIP. WAS UNDER FIVE YEARS OF AGE. WAS FURNISHED TRANSPORTATION (HALF FARE COSTING $53.25) ON TRANSPORTATION REQUEST. TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED WAS BASED ON RIGHT TO TRAVEL FROM NORFOLK. DIFFERENCE IN COST WAS COLLECTED FROM FREEMAN. IF THE TRAVEL OF FREEMAN'S DEPENDENTS HAD BEEN PERFORMED WHEN HIS ORDERS TO MAKE PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION BECAME EFFECTIVE OR WITHIN 60 DAYS THEREAFTER THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO TRANSPORTATION CHARGE FOR SAID CHILD.

A-31179, APRIL 7, 1930, 9 COMP. GEN. 439

TRANSPORTATION - DEPENDENTS OF NAVY ENLISTED MAN - DELAYED TRAVEL THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1920, 41 STAT. 604, DOES NOT AUTHORIZE TRANSPORTATION ON CHANGE OF STATION AT INCREASED COST BY REASON OF DEPENDENT'S DELAY IN TRAVEL, AND WHERE THERE IS A DELAY OF MORE THAN 60 DAYS, THE INCREASED COST OF TRANSPORTATION MUST BE BORNE BY THE OFFICER OR ENLISTED MAN CONCERNED. SUCH INCREASED COST SHOULD BE COLLECTED WHEN THE TRANSPORTATION IS ISSUED.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE PAYMASTER GENERAL OF THE NAVY, APRIL 7, 1930:

THERE HAS BEEN RECEIVED YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 15, 1930 (L-412787-FDT- X- 15) LOUIS FREEMAN, YEO 1 CL.), AND CORRESPONDENCE, RELATIVE TO COLLECTION FROM LOUIS FREEMAN, YEOMAN, 1C, UNITED STATES NAVY, COST OF TRANSPORTATION (HALF FARE) OF HIS CHILD WHICH BECAME FIVE YEARS OLD AFTER HIS CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS BECAME EFFECTIVE AND BEFORE TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED.

IT APPEARS THAT BY ORDERS OF SEPTEMBER 22, 1928, FREEMAN WAS DETACHED FROM DUTY AT THE RECEIVING SHIP, NEW YORK, N.Y., TO DUTY ON THE ASIATIC STATION; THAT WHEN THESE CHANGE OF DUTY ORDERS BECAME EFFECTIVE HIS DAUGHTER, MARGARET, WAS UNDER FIVE YEARS OF AGE; THAT SHE BECAME FIVE YEARS OLD ON MARCH 16, 1929, AND WAS FURNISHED TRANSPORTATION (HALF FARE COSTING $53.25) ON TRANSPORTATION REQUEST, FROM NEW YORK TO SAN FRANCISCO FOR TRAVEL COMMENCING MARCH 18, 1929. TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED WAS BASED ON RIGHT TO TRAVEL FROM NORFOLK, VA., TO SAN FRANCISCO, ALIF., AND DIFFERENCE IN COST WAS COLLECTED FROM FREEMAN. IF THE TRAVEL OF FREEMAN'S DEPENDENTS HAD BEEN PERFORMED WHEN HIS ORDERS TO MAKE PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION BECAME EFFECTIVE OR WITHIN 60 DAYS THEREAFTER THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO TRANSPORTATION CHARGE FOR SAID CHILD.

REQUEST HAS BEEN MADE BY THE NAVY DISBURSING OFFICER THAT FREEMAN'S ACCOUNT BE CHECKED THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED SAID CHILD, AND IN PROTEST OF SUCH CHECK AGE FREEMAN, IN LETTER OF FEBRUARY 1, 1930, EXPLAINS THAT SAID CHILD AND ANOTHER DAUGHTER, THREE YEARS OLD, CONTRACTED WHOOPING COUGH IN NOVEMBER, 1928, WHICH WAS FOLLOWED BY INFLUENZA, THUS MAKING IT NECESSARY FOR THE CHILDREN AND THEIR MOTHER TO DELAY TRAVEL UNTIL MARCH, 1929; AND BECAUSE OF SUCH NECESSARY DELAY FREEMAN CONTENDS THAT HE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO BEAR THE EXTRA COST OF TRANSPORTATION DUE TO THE CHILD BECOMING FIVE YEARS OF AGE BEFORE TRAVEL BEGAN. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, YOUR REQUEST INFORMATION WHETHER THE INCREASED COST OF THE TRANSPORTATION SO FURNISHED SHOULD BE COLLECTED.

RIGHT TO TRANSPORTATION OF THE DEPENDENTS IN KIND UNDER THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1920, 41 STAT. 604, ACCRUES ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDERS TO MAKE A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION AND THE OFFICER'S OR ENLISTED MAN'S RIGHT THERETO DOES NOT APPLY TO DEPENDENTS ACQUIRED AFTER EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDER. 2 COMP. GEN. 712; 4 ID. 438. THE PURPOSE OF THE LAW IS TO RELIEVE OFFICERS AND SOME ENLISTED MEN OF SOME OF THE NECESSARY EXPENSE OF CHANGE OF RESIDENCE OF THEIR DEPENDENTS INCIDENT TO THEIR CHANGE OF DUTY STATION. 3 COMP. GEN. 109. THE DEPENDENTS MAY BE FURNISHED TRANSPORTATION AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF A SUBSEQUENT CHANGE OF THE OFFICER'S STATION, WITHIN THE LIMIT OF THE GOVERNMENT'S OBLIGATION WHEN THE ORDERS BECOME EFFECTIVE. 5 COMP. GEN. 171; A-10591, OCTOBER 4, 1927. THE LAW DOES NOT AUTHORIZE TRANSPORTATION AT INCREASED COST BY REASON OF DEPENDENT'S DELAY IN TRAVEL, AND WHERE A CHILD WOULD HAVE BEEN TRANSPORTED FREE OF CHARGE WHEN ORDERS BECAME EFFECTIVE, OR WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME THEREAFTER, AND THE TRAVEL IS NOT PERFORMED UNTIL AFTER THE CHILD BECOMES FIVE YEARS OLD, INCREASED COST OF THE CHILD'S TRANSPORTATION SHOULD BE BORNE BY THE OFFICER OR ENLISTED MAN CONCERNED. PARAGRAPH 4-12 OF THE NAVY TRAVEL INSTRUCTIONS IS AS FOLLOWS:

* * * IN CASES WHERE APPLICATIONS FOR TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS ARE RECEIVED AFTER 60 DAYS FROM THE TIME OFFICER IS DETACHED FROM OLD STATION, THE GOVERNMENT WILL NOT BEAR THE COST OF ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION DUE TO CHILDREN BECOMING 5 YEARS OF AGE OR 12 YEARS OF AGE, AND COLLECTION SHOULD BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION AUTHORIZED AT THE TIME OFFICER IS DETACHED FROM OLD STATION OR WITHIN 60 DAYS THEREAFTER. * * *

THIS REGULATION IS A CORRECT STATEMENT OF THE DECISIONS APPLICABLE. SEE, ALSO, DECISION A-16097, DECEMBER 7, 1926; A-20008, OCTOBER 17, 1927.

UNDER THE LAW AND REGULATIONS IT WAS THE DUTY OF THE OFFICER ISSUING TRANSPORTATION IN THIS CASE TO COLLECT FROM FREEMAN THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF THE CHILD THAT BECAME FIVE YEARS OLD ON MARCH 16, 1929, AND WHOSE TRANSPORTATION WOULD HAVE BEEN WITHOUT COST TO THE GOVERNMENT WHEN THE ORDERS BECAME EFFECTIVE. DELAY IN TRAVEL OF THE DEPENDENTS MAY NOT INCREASE THE GOVERNMENT'S OBLIGATION TO FURNISH THEM TRANSPORTATION, AND THE INCREASED COST OF TRANSPORTATION DUE TO SUCH DELAY SHOULD BE BORNE BY FREEMAN. COLLECTION OF THE ITEM IN QUESTION IS REQUIRED BY THE STATUTE.