B-244508, Nov 26, 1991

B-244508, Nov 26, 1991

DIGEST: Employee received a travel advance in excess of his allowable expenses. His debt does not constitute an erroneous payment which might be subject to waiver consideration under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5584 (1988), since he did not receive a travel advance to cover erroneously authorized allowances, and he did not spend the advance in detrimental reliance on the erroneous authorization.

Timothy M. Trogdon - Waiver - Erroneous Travel Advance

Mr. Timothy M. Trogdon, a former employee of the Defense Logistics Agency, appeals our Claims Group settlement which denied his request for waiver under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5584 (1988). /1/ The issue we are presented is whether or not Mr. Trogdon's debt is subject to waiver.

In April 1988, Mr. Trogdon was issued permanent change-of-station orders transferring him from Wichita, Kansas, to Euclid, Ohio. In connection with his transfer, he received travel advances in the amount of $22,079.50. Mr. Trogdon later submitted travel vouchers which indicated that his allowable expenses for the transfer were $14,760.30. Thus, Mr. Trogdon was overpaid $7,319.20.

Mr. Trogdon requested that the overpayment be waived under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5584 (1988). Both his employing agency and our Claims Group denied his claim on the basis that the travel advance did not meet the conditions for waiver since there was no showing of erroneous travel orders or authorization. Mr. Trogdon's advances simply exceeded his allowable expenses. Mr. Trogdon contends that the travel advance is subject to waiver since it is an overpayment and that approximately $6,000 was received after he submitted his final travel vouchers. He fails to state, however, why he believes that he was entitled to retain the funds.

We agree with our Claims Group's determination that Mr. Trogdon's debt is not subject to waiver. For a travel advance to be appropriate for waiver consideration, the employee must have received a travel advance to cover erroneously authorized allowances and spent the advance in detrimental reliance on the erroneous authorization. Major Kenneth M. Dieter, 67 Comp.Gen. 496 (1988); Captain Jeffrey L. Parker, USAF, B-234751, Dec. 19, 1989; Saundra J. Samuels, B-226015, Apr. 25, 1988. See also Published Final Rule, Standards for Waiver of Claims for Erroneous Payment of Pay and Allowances, 56 Fed.Reg. 49,582 (1991), to be codified at 4 C.F.R. Sec. 91.4(d).

There is no indication in the record of erroneously authorized allowances. Mr. Trogdon was simply given an advance in excess of his allowable expenses. Accordingly, Mr. Trogdon's debt does not constitute an erroneous payment which might be subject to waiver consideration under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5584 (1988).

To: Director, Claims Group - GGD

From: General Counsel - James F. Hinchman

Subject: Timothy M. Trogdon - Request for Waiver B-244508-O.M.

We are returning Claims File Z-2903207. along with a copy of our decision of today B-244508, upholding your settlement certificate of January 29, 1990.

Attachments 2

/1/ The claim was forwarded to this Office for decision by our Claims Group, General Government Division, Claim No. Z-2867190.

/2/ 64 Comp.Gen. 727 (1985).

/3/ Mohawk Data Science Corporation, 69 Comp.Gen. 13 (1989); Federal Railroad Administration, B-242405, Mar. 15, 1991; Wackenhut Services, Inc., B-240994, Oct. 15, 1990.

/4/ See 63 Comp.Gen. 579, 584, 585 (1984); Wackenhut Services, Inc., supra.

Z-2903207-050, Jan. 29, 1990.