B-128949, SEP. 25, 1956

B-128949: Sep 25, 1956

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

TO MISS DOROTHY COOK: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 17. WHICH WAS EXPENDED BY YOU FOR COMMERCIAL AIR TRAVEL FROM PRESTWICK. $18 WAS WITHHELD TO LIQUIDATE AN OVERPAYMENT FOR PER DIEM REPORTED TO US BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY. THE OVERPAYMENT WAS MADE ON D.O. WAS DUE TO A DELAY EN ROUTE APPARENTLY IN NEW YORK FOR YOUR OWN CONVENIENCE. WHICH WAS CONTRARY TO MY TRAVEL ORDERS. ARTICLE 4159 (3) JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS WOULD APPEAR APPLICABLE IN MY CASE SINCE NO SPECIFIC MODE OF TRAVEL WAS DIRECTED IN MY TRAVEL ORDERS. IT IS NOT UNDERSTOOD HOW YOU RELY UPON THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR TRAVEL. YOU APPEAR TO BE A CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE AND AS SUCH ARE SUBJECT TO THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS.

B-128949, SEP. 25, 1956

TO MISS DOROTHY COOK:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 17, 1956, REQUESTING REVIEW OF VOUCHER SETTLEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 9, 1955, WHICH ALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR $18.69, REPRESENTING THE DOLLAR EQUIVALENT OF 6-13-0 POUNDS STERLING, BRITISH CURRENCY, WHICH WAS EXPENDED BY YOU FOR COMMERCIAL AIR TRAVEL FROM PRESTWICK, SCOTLAND, TO LONDON, ENGLAND, INCIDENT TO TRAVEL AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE MILITARY SEA TRANSPORTATION SERVICE.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT OF THE AMOUNT OF $18.69 ALLOWED, $18 WAS WITHHELD TO LIQUIDATE AN OVERPAYMENT FOR PER DIEM REPORTED TO US BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY. THE OVERPAYMENT WAS MADE ON D.O. VOUCHER NO. NIF 4, IN THE SEPTEMBER 1953 ACCOUNTS OF R. L. BURKE, SYMBOL 573613, AND WAS DUE TO A DELAY EN ROUTE APPARENTLY IN NEW YORK FOR YOUR OWN CONVENIENCE.

IN REQUESTING REVIEW YOU CLAIM AN AMOUNT OF $12.40, REPRESENTING COMMERCIAL RAIL FARE BETWEEN THE ABOVE POINTS OF TRAVEL. YOU STATE IN THIS CONNECTION THAT "ALTHOUGH I UTILIZED COMMERCIAL AIR TRANSPORTATION FROM PRESTWICK TO LONDON, WHICH WAS CONTRARY TO MY TRAVEL ORDERS, ARTICLE 4159 (3) JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS WOULD APPEAR APPLICABLE IN MY CASE SINCE NO SPECIFIC MODE OF TRAVEL WAS DIRECTED IN MY TRAVEL ORDERS, WHICH WOULD THEREFORE ENTITLE ME TO REIMBURSEMENT OF A COMMERCIAL RAIL CARRIER RATE.'

IT IS NOT UNDERSTOOD HOW YOU RELY UPON THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR TRAVEL, SINCE THEY APPLY ONLY TO UNIFORMED PERSONNEL. YOU APPEAR TO BE A CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE AND AS SUCH ARE SUBJECT TO THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS.

HOWEVER, IN OUR SETTLEMENT OF FEBRUARY 9, 1955, YOU WERE ALLOWED $18.69 FOR TRAVEL BETWEEN PRESTWICK AND LONDON ON THE BASIS OF COMMERCIAL AIR FARE WHICH WAS HIGHER THAN COMMERCIAL RAIL FARE AT THE TIME OF TRAVEL. IS THUS APPARENT THAT IF WE WERE TO RECOMPUTE YOUR FARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH YOUR REQUEST, THE AMOUNT ALLOWABLE PLUS 1/4-DAY ADDITIONAL PER DIEM OF $2.25, WOULD BE LESS THAN THAT PAID IN OUR SETTLEMENT AND YOU WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MAKE A REFUND TO THE UNITED STATES TO LIQUIDATE THE OVERPAYMENT OF PER DIEM.

ON THE BASIS OF THE PRESENT RECORD, OUR SETTLEMENT OF FEBRUARY 9, 1955, IS SUSTAINED.