B-108105(2), MAR 2, 1954

B-108105(2): Mar 2, 1954

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

USAF: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF JULY 13 AND SEPTEMBER 10. THE DISALLOWANCE OF WHICH WAS SUSTAINED IN DECISION DATED JULY 3. IT WAS CONCLUDED IN THAT DECISION THAT THE SUMS ALREADY PAID TO YOU FOR SUCH TRAVEL TOTALED $161.36 IN EXCESS OF THE AMOUNT PROPERLY PAYABLE. YOUR CLAIM WILL BE REEXAMINED ON THE PRESENT RECORD. THEY WERE (1) A POLICY OF THE COMMANDING GENERAL OF THE ORGANIZATION TO RETAIN PERSONNEL A REASONABLE LENGTH OF TIME. " AND (2) THAT YOUR COMMANDING OFFICER DECIDED THAT YOU SHOULD REMAIN AT IZMIR UNTIL CERTAIN EQUIPMENT WAS ASSEMBLED. WHILE SUCH STATEMENT INDICATES THAT YOU WERE REQUESTED TO REMAIN AT IZMIR AFTER MAY 17. SUCH AN INDEFINITE STATEMENT DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT YOU COULD NOT HAVE LEFT THAT PLACE IN TIME TO BOARD THE GOVERNMENT VESSEL WHICH LEFT PIRAEUS.

B-108105(2), MAR 2, 1954

PRECIS-UNAVAILABLE

LIEUTENANT COLONEL MARVIN L. HUNT, USAF:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF JULY 13 AND SEPTEMBER 10, 1953, CONCERNING YOUR CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TRAVEL OF YOURSELF AND YOUR DEPENDENTS FROM IZMIR, TURKEY, TO THE UNITED STATES, THE DISALLOWANCE OF WHICH WAS SUSTAINED IN DECISION DATED JULY 3, 1953, B- 108105. IT WAS CONCLUDED IN THAT DECISION THAT THE SUMS ALREADY PAID TO YOU FOR SUCH TRAVEL TOTALED $161.36 IN EXCESS OF THE AMOUNT PROPERLY PAYABLE.

WITH YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1953, YOU SUBMITTED A STATEMENT FROM YOUR FORMER COMMANDING OFFICER AND INDICATED THAT A FURTHER STATEMENT WOULD BE FURNISHED, BUT NOTHING FURTHER HAS BEEN RECEIVED. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, YOUR CLAIM WILL BE REEXAMINED ON THE PRESENT RECORD.

AS TO YOUR CLAIM FOR PER DIEM FOR A CONSTRUCTIVE DELAY IN GREECE, YOUR FORMER COMMANDING OFFICER REFERS TO TWO CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH, HE STATES, MILITATED AGAINST YOUR DEPARTURE FROM IZMIR ON MAY 17, 1950, THE DATE OF THE ORDERS RELEASING YOU FROM DUTY ASSIGNMENT AT IZMIR. THEY WERE (1) A POLICY OF THE COMMANDING GENERAL OF THE ORGANIZATION TO RETAIN PERSONNEL A REASONABLE LENGTH OF TIME, "PRESUMABLY THIRTY TO SIXTY DAYS, IN ORDER TO PROPERLY TRANSITION THE INCOMING OFFICER PRIOR TO THE OUTGOING OFFICER'S DEPARTURE," AND (2) THAT YOUR COMMANDING OFFICER DECIDED THAT YOU SHOULD REMAIN AT IZMIR UNTIL CERTAIN EQUIPMENT WAS ASSEMBLED. WHILE SUCH STATEMENT INDICATES THAT YOU WERE REQUESTED TO REMAIN AT IZMIR AFTER MAY 17, 1950, SUCH AN INDEFINITE STATEMENT DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT YOU COULD NOT HAVE LEFT THAT PLACE IN TIME TO BOARD THE GOVERNMENT VESSEL WHICH LEFT PIRAEUS, GREECE, ON JUNE 5, 1950, EN ROUTE TO THE UNITED STATES.

HOWEVER, EVEN IF YOU WERE NOT PERMITTED TO LEAVE IZMIR UNTIL JUNE 11, 1950, DATE OF ACTUAL DEPARTURE, THAT WOULD NOT ENTITLE YOU TO PER DIEM FOR CONSTRUCTIVE TIME AT PIRAEUS FROM THE DATE THE VESSEL ON WHICH YOU TRAVELED TO NAPLES ARRIVED AT PIRAEUS, TO JULY 11, 1950, DATE OF DEPARTURE OF THE NEXT GOVERNMENT VESSEL FOR THE UNITED STATES. APPARENTLY THE DATES OF DEPARTURE OF GOVERNMENT VESSELS FROM PIRAEUS WERE KNOWN TO YOU. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES THERE IS NO REASON - OTHER THAN FOR LEAVE PURPOSES - FOR AN OFFICER TO LEAVE HIS STATION WEEKS BEFORE THE VESSEL'S SAILING DATE AND HE SHOULD PLAN HIS DEPARTURE FROM HIS STATION AND HIS ARRIVAL AT THE PORT OF THE VESSEL SO AS TO AVOID ANY UNREASONABLE DELAY. AN EARLIER DEPARTURE FROM HIS STATION DOES NOT ENTITLE HIM TO PER DIEM FOR UNNECESSARY TIME SPENT AT THE PORT AWAITING THE ARRIVAL AND SAILING OF THE VESSEL.

WHILE IT MAY BE THAT A LARGE NUMBER OF PERSONNEL FROM THE TURKISH MISSION TRAVELED TO THE UNITED STATES BY GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT, VIA GERMANY, THAT FACT DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT ROUTE AS THE OFFICIAL ROUTE OF TRAVEL, A DETERMINATION OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION MAY BE FURNISHED TO MILITARY PERSONNEL BEING LARGELY A MATTER OF ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION. IF GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION WAS AVAILABLE AND NOT USED, THE TRAVELER'S RIGHT TO REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST OF TRAVEL BY COMMERCIAL MEANS IS DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF TRAVEL OVER THE OFFICIAL ROUTE, AND NO RIGHT TO PER DIEM CAN ACCRUE FOR TIME SPENT AWAITING THE AVAILABILITY OF TRANSPORTATION AT A POINT ON ANOTHER ROUTE OF TRAVEL, SUCH AS THE TIME YOU SPENT AT FRANKFURT, GERMANY, AWAITING MATS TRANSPORTATION TO THE UNITED STATES. THE FACT THAT YOU WERE AUTHORIZED LEAVE EN ROUTE TO VISIT ROME, SWITZERLAND AND GERMANY DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT ROUTE AS THE OFFICIAL ROUTE OF TRAVEL.

CONCERNING YOUR STATEMENT THAT "I WAS PRESENT FOR DUTY IN FRANKFURT THE ENTIRE TIME I WAS THERE WHICH WOULD PUT ME IN THE SAME CATEGORY AS ANY OTHER OFFICIAL ON TEMPORARY DUTY," YOU ARE ADVISED THAT PER DIEM IS PAYABLE ONLY FOR ORDERED TEMPORARY DUTY. IT IS NOT DISCLOSED THAT YOU WERE DIRECTED BY ORDERS TO PERFORM TEMPORARY DUTY AT FRANKFURT, IT APPEARING THAT YOUR PRESENCE AT THAT PLACE WAS ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF AWAITING FURTHER TRANSPORTATION TO THE UNITED STATES.

AS INDICATED IN THE DECISION OF JULY 3, 1953, THE $84 ALLOWED FOR CONSTRUCTIVE FARE FROM IZMIR TO PIRAEUS WAS "FOR TRAVEL OF YOURSELF AND DEPENDENTS." THAT AMOUNT WAS COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF TWO ADULT FARES OF $28 EACH AND TWO HALF FARES. NO FARE WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED FOR YOUR INFANT DAUGHTER, AGE SIX MONTHS.

YOUR LETTERS FURNISH NO BASIS FOR ANY CHANGE IN THE ACTION HERETOFORE TAKEN AND YOU ARE AGAIN REQUESTED TO REFUND THE SUM OF $161.36.