A-39283, JANUARY 8, 1932, 11 COMP. GEN. 270

A-39283: Jan 8, 1932

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

TRANSPORTATION - DEPENDENTS OF NAVY ENLISTED MAN WHERE TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS ARE ISSUED TO THE DEPENDENTS OF AN ENLISTED MAN OF THE NAVY ON HIS PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FOR TRAVEL TO A CHOSEN PERMITTED DESTINATION. FOR PERSONAL REASONS THE TRAVEL IS POINT. THE SITUATION IS THE SAME AS THOUGH THE TRANSPORTATION SITUATION IS THE SAME AS THOUGH THE TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS HAD BEEN ISSUED ORIGINALLY TO SUCH INTERMEDIATE POINTS. THE ENLISTED MAN'S RIGHTS FOR TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS ARE LIMITED TO THE TRANSPORTATION ACTUALLY USED. BY WHICH YOU WERE ALLOWED $14.27 OF THE AMOUNT CLAIMED AS REIMBURSEMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED WHAT IT WOULD HAVE COST THE GOVERNMENT TO TRANSPORT YOUR DEPENDENTS (WIFE) FROM OGDEN.

A-39283, JANUARY 8, 1932, 11 COMP. GEN. 270

TRANSPORTATION - DEPENDENTS OF NAVY ENLISTED MAN WHERE TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS ARE ISSUED TO THE DEPENDENTS OF AN ENLISTED MAN OF THE NAVY ON HIS PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FOR TRAVEL TO A CHOSEN PERMITTED DESTINATION, AND FOR PERSONAL REASONS THE TRAVEL IS POINT, ONLY, THE SITUATION IS THE SAME AS THOUGH THE TRANSPORTATION SITUATION IS THE SAME AS THOUGH THE TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS HAD BEEN ISSUED ORIGINALLY TO SUCH INTERMEDIATE POINTS, AND THE ENLISTED MAN'S RIGHTS FOR TRANSPORTATION OF HIS DEPENDENTS ARE LIMITED TO THE TRANSPORTATION ACTUALLY USED.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO MAX M. MCCOY, YEOMAN, FIRST CLASS, UNITED STATES NAVY, JANUARY 8, 1932:

THERE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF SETTLEMENT NO. 0260610, DATED AUGUST 31, 1931, BY WHICH YOU WERE ALLOWED $14.27 OF THE AMOUNT CLAIMED AS REIMBURSEMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED WHAT IT WOULD HAVE COST THE GOVERNMENT TO TRANSPORT YOUR DEPENDENTS (WIFE) FROM OGDEN, UTAH, TO SAN PEDRO, CALIF., IN ADDITION TO THE COST TO THE GOVERNMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED IN KIND FROM CEDAR FALLS, IOWA, TO SEATTLE, WASH., AND USED FOR BAGGAGE TO SEATTLE, FOR PULLMAN TO LOS ANGELES, AND FOR RAIL FARE TO OGDEN.

IT APPEARS THAT YOU WERE PERMANENTLY ATTACHED TO THE U.S.S. OKLAHOMA AT THE TIME THE HOME PORT OF SAID VESSEL WAS CHANGED, MARCH 24, 1930, FROM PHILADELPHIA, PA., TO SAN PEDRO, CALIF., BY NAVY DEPARTMENT ORDER NO. BB37/L9-5 (1) (300324); THAT THE HOME YARD OF THE VESSEL WAS CHANGED AT THE SAME TIME FROM PHILADELPHIA TO BREMERTON, WASH.; THAT ON JUNE 2, 1930, PRIOR TO THE SAILING OF THE OKLAHOMA FROM NORFOLK, VA., TO SAN PEDRO, CALIF., YOU WERE ASSIGNED TO TEMPORARY DUTY AS ESCORT FOR A CORPSE WITH ORDERS TO REPORT TO SAN PEDRO, JUNE 23, 1930; THAT AT THE TIME OF YOUR DEPARTURE FROM THE SHIP THE SHIP'S SCHEDULE PROVIDED FOR HER BEING AT SEATTLE, WASH., ON JULY 3, 1930; THAT, ACCORDINGLY, TRANSPORTATION WAS REQUESTED FOR YOUR WIFE FROM CEDAR FALLS, IOWA, TO SEATTLE, WASH., STARTING JUNE 15, 1930, WITH A 10-DAY STOPOVER AT KANSAS CITY, MO.; AND THAT BY REASON OF THE PROPOSED TRAVEL VIA KANSAS CITY, RATHER THAN THE DIRECT ROUTE, THE COST OF THE TRANSPORTATION TO BE FURNISHED WAS COMPUTED AS BEING $14.27 IN EXCESS OF THE REGULAR FARE FOR TRAVEL FROM CEDAR FALLS TO SEATTLE.

IT FURTHER APPEARS THAT UPON YOUR RETURN TO THE SHIP AT SAN PEDRO YOU DISCOVERED THAT A CHANGE HAD BEEN MADE IN THE SHIP'S SAILING SCHEDULE REQUIRING IT TO REMAIN IN SAN PEDRO UNTIL JULY 28, 1930; THAT AT THAT TIME IT WAS TOO LATE TO REQUEST A CHANGE IN THE DESTINATION OF THE TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS COVERING TRAVEL ALREADY COMMENCED; AND THAT, FOR YOUR OWN CONVENIENCE, OR THE CONVENIENCE OF YOUR DEPENDENT, YOU INSTRUCTED YOUR WIFE, BY TELEGRAPH, TO LEAVE THE TRAIN AT OGDEN, UTAH, AND PROCEED AT YOUR EXPENSE TO LOS ANGELES, CALIF.

YOU WERE ENTITLED, UNDER THE LAW AND REGULATIONS, TO HAVE YOUR DEPENDENT TRANSPORTED, ON YOUR CHANGE OF STATION, TO EITHER THE NEW HOME YARD OR THE NEW HOME PORT OF THE VESSEL. HAVING SELECTED SEATTLE AS THE POINT TO WHICH YOUR DEPENDENT WAS TO TRAVEL, AND TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS HAVING BEEN ISSUED FOR TRAVEL TO THAT POINT, AND TRAVEL HAVING BEEN ACTUALLY STARTED TO THAT POINT, YOU HAD NO FURTHER CHOICE IN SELECTING A DIFFERENT DESTINATION FOR YOUR DEPENDENT IF THE TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS, AS ISSUED, COULD NOT BE HONORED TO THE NEWLY SELECTED POINT.

IN HAVING YOUR DEPENDENT LEAVE THE TRAIN AT OGDEN, UTAH, THE SITUATION IS NO DIFFERENT FROM A DECISION ON YOUR PART OR ON THE PART OF YOUR DEPENDENT TO SELECT OGDEN AS YOUR ORIGINAL DESTINATION ON THE TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED. IN SUCH A CASE YOUR RIGHTS ARE LIMITED TO THE TRANSPORTATION ACTUALLY USED. INASMUCH AS THE GOVERNMENT HAS FURNISHED TRANSPORTATION IN KIND TO OGDEN FOR YOUR DEPENDENT, HAS PAID THE CARRIER FOR TRANSPORTATION OF YOUR WIFE'S BAGGAGE TO SEATTLE, AND YOUR WIFE USED THE TRANSPORTATION REQUEST FOR PULLMAN ACCOMMODATIONS OGDEN TO LOS ANGELES INSTEAD OF OGDEN TO SEATTLE, YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION FOR YOUR DEPENDENT.

HOWEVER, INASMUCH AS THE EXCESS COST OF $14.27 COLLECTED FROM YOU FOR THE CONTEMPLATED TRAVEL TO SEATTLE, VIA KANSAS CITY, DOES NOT APPLY TO TRAVEL VIA KANSAS CITY WHEN THE DESTINATION IS OGDEN, AND SETTLEMENT WITH THE CARRIER WAS ON THAT BASIS, REFUND MAY BE MADE TO YOU OF THE $14.27 HERETOFORE COLLECTED. ACCORDINGLY, SETTLEMENT NO. 0260610, DATED AUGUST 31, 1931, WAS CORRECT. IT MUST BE, AND IS, SUSTAINED.

CHECK NO. 131,537, DATED SEPTEMBER 3, 1931, ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE SETTLEMENT REFERRED TO ABOVE, IS RETURNED.