B-140328, DEC. 30, 1960
Highlights
BECAUSE SUCH REIMBURSEMENT IS PROHIBITED BY SECTION 901 OF THE MERCHANT MARINE ACT. WAS SUSTAINED BY OUR DECISIONS OF SEPTEMBER 16. YOU ARE INFORMED THAT THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED ONLY AS GENERAL POLICIES AND GUIDELINES FOR USE BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS IN EVALUATING THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THE USE OF A FOREIGN VESSEL. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT SECTION 901 PROVIDES. THE INFORMATION YOU FURNISH AS TO THE SHIPMENTS FROM VENICE TO THE UNITED STATES IS NOT IN ACCORD WITH DATA FURNISHED US BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. THE STATEMENT AS TO SHIPMENTS FROM ITALY IS TOO GENERAL TO WARRANT OUR MAKING ANY SPECIFIC COMMENT THEREON. THE VALIDITY OF THE AMENDMENT TO YOUR ORDERS WHICH PURPORTS TO RETROACTIVELY INCREASE THE RIGHTS SPECIFIED IN THE ORIGINAL AUTHORIZATION IS OPEN TO OBJECTION.
B-140328, DEC. 30, 1960
TO MISS SHARON E. ERDKAMP:
ON DECEMBER 7, 1960, YOU REQUESTED FURTHER REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF JUNE 19, 1959, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF OCEAN FREIGHT PAID FOR THE SHIPMENT OF AN AUTOMOBILE AND ACCESSORIES FROM CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, TO NAPLES, ITALY, ON A VESSEL OF FOREIGN REGISTRY, BECAUSE SUCH REIMBURSEMENT IS PROHIBITED BY SECTION 901 OF THE MERCHANT MARINE ACT, 1936, 46 U.S.C. 1241 (A). THAT SETTLEMENT, AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION AND REVIEW, WAS SUSTAINED BY OUR DECISIONS OF SEPTEMBER 16, 1959, AND OCTOBER 26, 1960, TO YOU.
CONCERNING THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE'S INSTRUCTIONS RELATING TO THE USE OF AMERICAN AND FOREIGN VESSELS, YOU ARE INFORMED THAT THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED ONLY AS GENERAL POLICIES AND GUIDELINES FOR USE BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS IN EVALUATING THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THE USE OF A FOREIGN VESSEL. OUR OFFICE HAS REQUESTED THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE TO RE- EXAMINE SECTION 151.3 (B) SINCE WE CONSIDER IT TO BE TOO BROADLY STATED AND THUS SUSCEPTIBLE OF USE IN CASES WHICH WOULD NOT CONFORM WITH SECTION 901. IN THAT REGARD, IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT SECTION 901 PROVIDES, IN PART, AS FOLLOWS (QUOTING FROM 46 U.S.C. 1241 (A) ):
"* * * THAT THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES SHALL NOT CREDIT ANY ALLOWANCE FOR TRAVEL OR SHIPPING EXPENSES INCURRED ON A FOREIGN SHIP IN THE ABSENCE OF SATISFACTORY PROOF OF THE NECESSITY THEREFOR.'
THE INFORMATION YOU FURNISH AS TO THE SHIPMENTS FROM VENICE TO THE UNITED STATES IS NOT IN ACCORD WITH DATA FURNISHED US BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. MOREOVER, THE STATEMENT AS TO SHIPMENTS FROM ITALY IS TOO GENERAL TO WARRANT OUR MAKING ANY SPECIFIC COMMENT THEREON.
IN YOUR CASE, WE MUST EMPHASIZE, ALSO, THAT OUR OFFICE DID NOT RECOGNIZE AS VALID THE AMENDMENT TO YOUR TRAVEL ORDERS WHICH PURPORTED RECTROACTIVELY TO DIVEST YOU OF THE RIGHT UNDER THE ORIGINAL AUTHORIZATION TO TRANSPORT YOUR AUTOMOBILE. LIKEWISE, THE VALIDITY OF THE AMENDMENT TO YOUR ORDERS WHICH PURPORTS TO RETROACTIVELY INCREASE THE RIGHTS SPECIFIED IN THE ORIGINAL AUTHORIZATION IS OPEN TO OBJECTION.
THEREFORE, WE MUST AGAIN SUSTAIN THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM.
REGARDING FURTHER ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL, YOU ARE INFORMED THAT, IN ADDITION TO THE SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL, IN 46 U.S.C. 1241 (A), QUOTED ABOVE, DECISIONS OF OUR OFFICE ARE FINAL AND CONCLUSIVE UPON THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND ESTABLISHMENTS OF THE GOVERNMENT.