B-134365, NOV. 27, 1957

B-134365: Nov 27, 1957

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

SP-2: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 29. YOU WERE TRANSFERRED FROM FORT BUCHANAN. MINOR STEPSON) WERE AUTHORIZED TO ACCOMPANY YOU TO THE UNITED STATES. YOU WERE PAID $5.46 FOR THE TRAVEL OF YOUR DAUGHTER BASED ON THE DISTANCE FROM NEW YORK. YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED FOR THE REASON THAT GOVERNMENT SEA AND AIR TRANSPORTATION WAS AVAILABLE FROM PUERTO RICO TO THE UNITED STATES DURING THE PERIOD OF YOUR DAUGHTER'S TRAVEL. YOU URGE THAT YOUR CLAIM BE ALLOWED FOR THE STATED REASON THAT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR UNACCOMPANIED MINORS TO OBTAIN GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION AND THAT YOUR DAUGHTER WAS ONLY 14 YEARS OF AGE AT THE TIME SHE TRAVELED. TRANSPORTATION BY GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT WAS AVAILABLE FOR YOUR 14-YEAR OLD DAUGHTER.

B-134365, NOV. 27, 1957

TO AYTON D. RAMIREZ, SP-2:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 29, 1957, IN EFFECT REQUESTING REVIEW OF SETTLEMENT DATED OCTOBER 9, 1957, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TRAVEL OF YOUR DEPENDENT MINOR DAUGHTER FROM MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA, WHILE PROCEEDING FROM MAYAGUEZ, PUERTO RICO, TO THE LATTER PLACE.

BY ORDERS OF APRIL 27, 1956, YOU WERE TRANSFERRED FROM FORT BUCHANAN, PUERTO RICO, TO ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, MARYLAND. YOUR DEPENDENTS (WIFE, MINOR DAUGHTER, AND MINOR STEPSON) WERE AUTHORIZED TO ACCOMPANY YOU TO THE UNITED STATES. YOU STATE THAT YOUR DAUGHTER TRAVELED BY COMMERCIAL AIR FROM PUERTO RICO TO PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA, VIA MIAMI, FLORIDA, DURING THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 1 TO 10, 1956. YOUR WIFE AND MINOR STEPSON TRAVELED BY GOVERNMENT TRANSPORT TO BROOKLYN, NEW YORK, IN APRIL 1957. YOU WERE PAID $5.46 FOR THE TRAVEL OF YOUR DAUGHTER BASED ON THE DISTANCE FROM NEW YORK, NEW YORK, TO PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED FOR THE REASON THAT GOVERNMENT SEA AND AIR TRANSPORTATION WAS AVAILABLE FROM PUERTO RICO TO THE UNITED STATES DURING THE PERIOD OF YOUR DAUGHTER'S TRAVEL. YOU URGE THAT YOUR CLAIM BE ALLOWED FOR THE STATED REASON THAT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR UNACCOMPANIED MINORS TO OBTAIN GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION AND THAT YOUR DAUGHTER WAS ONLY 14 YEARS OF AGE AT THE TIME SHE TRAVELED.

AS TO UNACCOMPANIED MINORS UTILIZING GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION, PARAGRAPH 3C (7), SPECIAL REGULATIONS 55-730-1 PROVIDES THAT PERSONS UNDER 16 YEARS OF AGE MAY BE TRANSPORTED ON ARMY TRANSPORTS ONLY WHEN UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF A RESPONSIBLE ADULT. HOWEVER, TRANSPORTATION BY GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT WAS AVAILABLE FOR YOUR 14-YEAR OLD DAUGHTER, IT BEING PROVIDED IN NOTE 4C TO PARAGRAPH 13, ARMY REGULATIONS, 96-25, THAT ONLY CHILDREN UNDER 12 YEARS OF AGE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR TRANSPORTATION IN GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT UNLESS ACCOMPANIED BY PARENT OR OTHER RESPONSIBLE ADULT DESIGNATED BY THE PARENT.

JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO SECTION 303 OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949, 63 STAT. 813, PROVIDE IN PARAGRAPH 7002- 1B THAT, WITH CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS NOT HERE MATERIAL, TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS FOR TRAVEL TO AND FROM THE UNITED STATES WILL BE BY GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT OR VESSELS, IF AVAILABLE. IN A REPORT FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF TRANSPORTATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, IT IS STATED THAT SURFACE AND AIR TRANSPORTATION WAS AVAILABLE FOR ALL ELIGIBLE DEPENDENTS TRAVELING FROM PUERTO RICO TO THE UNITED STATES DURING THE PERIOD IN QUESTION. THE REGULATIONS DO NOT PROVIDE FOR REIMBURSEMENT TO A MEMBER WHOSE DEPENDENTS DO NOT AVAIL THEMSELVES OF GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION AND VOLUNTARILY PERFORM COMMERCIAL TRAVEL AT HIS EXPENSE FOR THEIR PERSONAL CONVENIENCE. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT YOUR DAUGHTER COULD HAVE TRAVELED TO THE UNITED STATES BY GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT. YOUR WIFE ACTUALLY TRAVELED TO NEW YORK BY GOVERNMENT VESSEL IN APRIL 1957. YOUR DAUGHTER COULD HAVE TRAVELED WITH HER AT THAT TIME OR THEY COULD HAVE ACCOMPLISHED THE SAME TRAVEL PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 1956. THE FACT THAT YOUR WIFE DECIDED TO TRAVEL AT A LATER TIME, FURNISHES NO BASIS FOR A CONCLUSION THAT GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO NEW YORK.