Skip to Highlights
Highlights

RETIRED: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 1. YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED BY DECISION B-139563 OF AUGUST 21. IT WAS STATED THAT SINCE THE ORDERS EFFECTING YOUR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY ON JUNE 30. WERE RECEIVED BY YOU ON FEBRUARY 18. IT MUST BE CONCLUDED THAT HAD YOU DESIRED GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION IT WOULD HAVE BEEN FURNISHED PROMPTLY UPON YOUR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY HAD YOU MADE TIMELY APPLICATION THEREFOR. IN YOUR PRESENT LETTER YOU STATE THAT ALTHOUGH WHAT WAS SAID IN THE DECISION MIGHT USUALLY BE A REASONABLE ASSUMPTION. 1957 TRANSPORTATION BETWEEN HAWAII AND THE MAINLAND IN GOVERNMENT SHIPS AND AIRCRAFT WAS IN FACT SO INADEQUATE THAT NUMEROUS PERSONNEL WERE BEING SENT IN COMMERCIAL SHIPS.

View Decision

B-139563, OCT. 16, 1959

TO REAR ADMIRAL ROWLAND H. GROFF, USN, RETIRED:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1959, RELATIVE TO YOUR CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS BELIEVED DUE FOR TRAVEL PERFORMED BY YOU AND YOUR WIFE INCIDENT TO YOUR RETIREMENT AND RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY AT PEARL HARBOR, HAWAII, AND YOUR SELECTION OF ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND, AS YOUR HOME UPON RETIREMENT.

YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED BY DECISION B-139563 OF AUGUST 21, 1959. WITH RESPECT TO TRAVEL FROM HAWAII TO CALIFORNIA, IT WAS STATED THAT SINCE THE ORDERS EFFECTING YOUR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY ON JUNE 30, 1957, WERE RECEIVED BY YOU ON FEBRUARY 18, 1957, IT MUST BE CONCLUDED THAT HAD YOU DESIRED GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION IT WOULD HAVE BEEN FURNISHED PROMPTLY UPON YOUR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY HAD YOU MADE TIMELY APPLICATION THEREFOR. IN YOUR PRESENT LETTER YOU STATE THAT ALTHOUGH WHAT WAS SAID IN THE DECISION MIGHT USUALLY BE A REASONABLE ASSUMPTION, IT HAS NO BEARING IN THIS INSTANCE FOR THE REASON THAT UPON RETIREMENT YOU HAD A YEAR IN WHICH TO SELECT A HOME AND TO TRAVEL THERETO, AND THAT YOU KNOW OF NO REQUIREMENT THAT TRANSPORTATION MUST BE REQUESTED AT ANY PARTICULAR TIME. YOU FURTHER STATE THAT IN JULY, 1957 TRANSPORTATION BETWEEN HAWAII AND THE MAINLAND IN GOVERNMENT SHIPS AND AIRCRAFT WAS IN FACT SO INADEQUATE THAT NUMEROUS PERSONNEL WERE BEING SENT IN COMMERCIAL SHIPS.

ANY RIGHT OF A MEMBER OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES TO GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION FOR HIMSELF AND HIS DEPENDENTS ACCRUES ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDERS, AND THE FACT THAT TRAVEL INCIDENT TO RETIREMENT ORDERS MAY BE PERFORMED AT ANY TIME DURING THE SUCCEEDING YEAR OPERATES IN NO WAY TO INCREASE THE OBLIGATION OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THIS RESPECT. INCIDENT TO YOUR RETIREMENT, AND ON THE BASIS OF YOUR EVENTUAL SELECTION OF ANNAPOLIS AS YOUR HOME, YOU WERE ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION FOR YOURSELF AND YOUR DEPENDENT FROM HONOLULU TO ANNAPOLIS BY WAY OF SAN FRANCISCO. YOUR ACTUAL TRAVEL WAS VIA JAPAN AND GERMANY. IRRESPECTIVE OF THE TYPE OF TRANSPORTATION WHICH MIGHT HAVE BEEN FURNISHED HAD TRAVEL BEEN OVER THE USUALLY TRAVELED DIRECT ROUTE, THE CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF SUCH TRAVEL WHEN ACTUAL TRAVEL IS BY A CIRCUITOUS ROUTE CONSISTENTLY HAS BEEN COMPUTED ON THE BASIS THAT, FOR TRAVEL OUTSIDE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES BETWEEN POINTS ON THE ESTABLISHED ROUTE SERVED BY GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTS, AUTHORIZED TRANSPORTATION WOULD HAVE BEEN FURNISHED IN KIND. YOUR CLAIM WAS SETTLED ON THAT BASIS.

SINCE YOUR LETTER FURNISHES NO EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL INFORMATION NOT PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED, IT AFFORDS NO BASIS FOR MODIFICATION OF THE PRIOR ACTION IN THE MATTER. ACCORDINGLY, THE DECISION OF AUGUST 21, 1959, IS AFFIRMED.

GAO Contacts