B-144345, FEB. 8, 1961
Highlights
THE DECISION SET FORTH THE REASONS WHY WE WERE UNABLE TO ACT FAVORABLY ON YOUR CASE. NO DETERMINATION OF ADVANTAGE FOR YOUR TRAVEL BY SUCH MODE OF TRANSPORTATION WAS MADE AND. SINCE THE MATTER WAS FULLY CONSIDERED BY US IN RENDERING OUR DECISION OF JANUARY 18. WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO SUSTAIN OUR DECISION.
B-144345, FEB. 8, 1961
TO MR. JACK C. MIKLOS:
YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 24, 1961, REQUESTS REVIEW OF OUR DECISION OF JANUARY 18, 1961, TO YOU. THAT DECISION SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE FOR EXCESS COSTS CLAIMED ON YOUR TRAVEL VOUCHER REIMBURSING YOU FOR TRAVEL FROM STANFORD, CALIFORNIA, TO WASHINGTON,D.C., UPON YOUR TRANSFER OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION TO WASHINGTON.
THE DECISION SET FORTH THE REASONS WHY WE WERE UNABLE TO ACT FAVORABLY ON YOUR CASE. YOU NOW SAY THAT YOU BELIEVE SECTION 3.5B OF THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS TO BE APPLICABLE TO YOUR CLAIM. THAT SECTION OF THE REGULATIONS REQUIRES THAT TRAVEL BY PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLE MUST BE AUTHORIZED OR APPROVED BY THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY OR BY THE PROPER OFFICIAL DESIGNATED BY HIM AS BEING MORE ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT. HOWEVER, NO DETERMINATION OF ADVANTAGE FOR YOUR TRAVEL BY SUCH MODE OF TRANSPORTATION WAS MADE AND, THEREFORE, UNDER THE REGULATIONS PAYMENT ON A MILEAGE BASIS MUST BE LIMITED TO THE COST OF TRAVEL BY COMMON CARRIER, INCLUDING PER DIEM IN LIEU OF SUBSISTENCE.
SINCE THE MATTER WAS FULLY CONSIDERED BY US IN RENDERING OUR DECISION OF JANUARY 18, AND SINCE YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 24 ADDS NO MATERIAL FACTS TO THE CASE, WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO SUSTAIN OUR DECISION.