B-89963, JUL. 19, 1955

B-89963: Jul 19, 1955

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

USN: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF MARCH 12 AND MARCH 20. YOUR CLAIMS WERE DISALLOWED UNDER PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACT OF MARCH 3. WHICH STATED THAT NAVAL PERSONNEL "SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO THE ALLOWANCES AUTHORIZED BY THIS SECTION WHEN NAVAL TENDER FACILITIES OR THE EQUIVALENT THEREOF ARE AVAILABLE * * *.'. THE EQUIVALENT OF SUCH FACILITIES WERE REGARDED AS BEING AVAILABLE DURING THE PERIODS INVOLVED FOR THE REASONS STATED IN DECISION OF MARCH 22. COPY OF WHICH WAS MAILED TO YOU UNDER DATE OF MAY 18. WHERE OFFICERS WERE FURNISHED MEALS AT A COST OF $40 PER MONTH AT WHAT YOU DESCRIBE TO BE A "CLOSED MESS.'. WAS AN "OPEN MESS.'. THE DECISION OF MARCH 22 WAS BASED. THAT NECESSARILY WAS SO BECAUSE THE CLAIMANT IN THAT CASE PERFORMED AERIAL SURVEY DUTY AT THAT PLACE DURING PART OF THE PERIOD INVOLVED AND NO DEFINITE INFORMATION WAS FURNISHED FROM AN OFFICIAL NAVAL SOURCE AT GOOSE BAY AS TO THE MESSING CONDITIONS WHICH EXISTED AT THAT PLACE.

B-89963, JUL. 19, 1955

TO LIEUTENANT W. V. STEUTEVILLE, USN:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF MARCH 12 AND MARCH 20, 1955, REQUESTING REVIEW OF THOSE PARTS OF SETTLEMENTS DATED APRIL 27, 1949, AND APRIL 2, 1952, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIMS FOR PER DIEM IN CONNECTION WITH AERIAL SURVEY DUTY PERFORMED BY YOU AT GOOSE BAY, LABRADOR, DURING THE MONTHS OF JUNE THROUGH SEPTEMBER IN THE YEARS 1948 AND 1949, RESPECTIVELY.

YOUR CLAIMS WERE DISALLOWED UNDER PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE ACT OF MARCH 3, 1925, AS AMENDED, 34 U.S.C. 893, WHICH STATED THAT NAVAL PERSONNEL "SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO THE ALLOWANCES AUTHORIZED BY THIS SECTION WHEN NAVAL TENDER FACILITIES OR THE EQUIVALENT THEREOF ARE AVAILABLE * * *.' THE EQUIVALENT OF SUCH FACILITIES WERE REGARDED AS BEING AVAILABLE DURING THE PERIODS INVOLVED FOR THE REASONS STATED IN DECISION OF MARCH 22, 1950, B-90074, TO LIEUTENANT (JG) ROBERT F. LYONS, COPY OF WHICH WAS MAILED TO YOU UNDER DATE OF MAY 18, 1950.

YOU APPEAR TO REGARD THE DECISION OF MARCH 22, 1950, AS BEING BASED SOLELY ON CONDITIONS EXISTING AT ARGENTIA, NEWFOUNDLAND, WHERE OFFICERS WERE FURNISHED MEALS AT A COST OF $40 PER MONTH AT WHAT YOU DESCRIBE TO BE A "CLOSED MESS.' YOU STATE THAT THE "OFFICERS' CLUB" AT WHICH YOU SECURED YOUR MEALS AT GOOSE BAY, LABRADOR, WAS AN "OPEN MESS.' THE DECISION OF MARCH 22 WAS BASED, TO SOME EXTENT, ON THE CONDITIONS WHICH EXISTED AT ARGENTIA. THAT NECESSARILY WAS SO BECAUSE THE CLAIMANT IN THAT CASE PERFORMED AERIAL SURVEY DUTY AT THAT PLACE DURING PART OF THE PERIOD INVOLVED AND NO DEFINITE INFORMATION WAS FURNISHED FROM AN OFFICIAL NAVAL SOURCE AT GOOSE BAY AS TO THE MESSING CONDITIONS WHICH EXISTED AT THAT PLACE. HOWEVER, IT ALSO WAS HELD IN THE CITED DECISION THAT "WHERE AN OFFICER ON AERIAL SURVEY DUTY WAS FURNISHED QUARTERS, THE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT HE MAY HAVE BEEN REQUIRED TO PAY SOMEWHAT MORE FOR HIS MEALS AT AN OFFICERS' CLUB THAT HE MIGHT HAVE HAD TO PAY AT AN OFFICERS' MESS CONDUCTED ON A NAVAL TENDER WOULD NOT WARRANT PAYING HIM A PER DIEM ALLOWANCE OF $6 A DAY UNDER THE SAID ACT OF MARCH 3, 1925, ON THE BASIS THAT THE GENERAL EQUIVALENT OF NAVAL TENDER FACILITIES WAS NOT AVAILABLE, WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT ACT.'

A REPORT FROM THE COMMANDING OFFICER, PATROL SQUADRON SIXTY-TWO, VP 62, NAVAL AIR STATION, PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND, DATED SEPTEMBER 6, 1949, STATES THAT THE COST OF MEALS AT THE GOOSE BY MESS VARIED FROM $2.65 TO $3.25 PER DAY. MEALS ARE NOT FURNISHED FREE OF CHARGE TO OFFICERS ON NAVAL VESSELS, INCLUDING NAVAL TENDERS. WHILE THE EXACT COST OF SUCH MEALS IS NOT KNOWN HERE AND IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT SUCH COSTS VARY ON DIFFERENT VESSELS, THE DIFFERENCE IN THE COST OF SUCH MEALS AND THOSE WHICH COULD BE SECURED AT THE GOOSE BAY MESS WOULD NOT BE SUCH AS TO WARRANT A CONCLUSION THAT THE CONGRESS INTENDED THAT PER DIEM AT THE RATE OF $6 PER DAY SHOULD BE PAID FOR AERIAL SURVEY DUTY PERFORMED UNDER SUCH CONDITIONS. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENT OF NAVAL TENDER FACILITIES WAS AVAILABLE AT GOOSE BAY DURING THE PERIODS OF YOUR CLAIMS.

CONCERNING YOUR STATEMENT THAT YOU HAVE LEARNED THAT THE CLAIMS OF LIEUTENANT COMMANDER YOUNG, LIEUTENANT KOBERG AND LIEUTENANT (JG) RUTHVEN- -- ALL OF WHOM YOU SAY ARE NAMED IN YOUR ORDERS OF MAY 13, 1949 -- HAVE BEEN PAID, IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT EITHER LIEUTENANT KOBERG OR LIEUTENANT (JG) RUTHVEN SUBMITTED THEIR CLAIMS HERE. THE NAME OF LIEUTENANT COMMANDER YOUND DOES NOT APPEAR IN SUCH ORDERS. HOWEVER, THE CLAIM OF LIEUTENANT (JG) GORDON S. YOUNG FOR PER DIEM FOR AERIAL SURVEY DUTY UNDER ORDERS OF MAY 12, 1948, WAS DISALLOWED BY SETTLEMENT OF APRIL 21, 1949, AND THE SETTLEMENT WAS SUSTAINED IN OUR DECISION DATED MARCH 22, 1950, B- 88838.

ACCORDINGLY, THE SETTLEMENTS OF APRIL 27, 1949, AND APRIL 2, 1952, ARE SUSTAINED. YOUR ORIGINAL ORDERS OF MAY 13, 1949, AND JUNE 1, 1948, WITH ENDORSEMENTS, ARE RETURNED HEREWITH.