B-123828, MAY 24, 1955, 34 COMP. GEN. 628
Highlights
IS NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE THE EXCESS COST OF TRANSPORTATION BASED ON ESTIMATED ROUND-TRIP TRAVEL FROM HIS HOME DEDUCTED FROM HIS PER DIEM. IN WHICH HE AGREED TO PERFORM CERTAIN SERVICES FROM TIME TO TIME AS REQUIRED BY THE UNITED STATES COMMISSIONER AS CONSULTANT ON ENGINEERING MATTERS FOR WHICH HE WAS TO BE PAID $100 A DAY FOR ALL DAYS NECESSARILY ENGAGED ON THE WORK OF THAT COMMISSION. TIPTON WAS IN WASHINGTON. THE PER DIEM IN LIEU OF SUBSISTENCE WOULD HAVE BEEN PAYABLE FOR 3 1/2 DAYS IN EITHER CASE. SO YOUR DOUBT IN THE MATTER IS NOT WHETHER THE AMOUNT OF PER DIEM IS CORRECT BUT WHETHER THE EXCESS TRANSPORTATION COST SHOULD BE APPLIED AGAINST THE SUBSISTENCE PER DIEM OTHERWISE DUE. OR IN THE TRAVEL ORDER THAT THE TRAVEL ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS IS TO BE RECKONED ONLY FROM DENVER.
B-123828, MAY 24, 1955, 34 COMP. GEN. 628
TRAVELING EXPENSES - CONSULTANTS EMPLOYED ON PER DIEM WHEN ACTUALLY EMPLOYED BASIS - PLACE FROM WHICH ENTITLED A CONSULTANT EMPLOYED ON A WHEN ACTUALLY EMPLOYED BASIS WHO USED A TRANSPORTATION REQUEST FOR TRAVEL FROM A PLACE OTHER THAN HIS RESIDENCE TO ATTEND AN OFFICIAL BUSINESS MEETING, AND TO RETURN TO HIS HOME, IS NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE THE EXCESS COST OF TRANSPORTATION BASED ON ESTIMATED ROUND-TRIP TRAVEL FROM HIS HOME DEDUCTED FROM HIS PER DIEM.
ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL WEITZEL TO MISS JANET WENDLER, INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND MEXICO, MAY 24, 1955:
YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 28, 1955, REQUESTS OUR DECISION WHETHER YOU MAY CERTIFY FOR PAYMENT THE VOUCHER THEREWITH TRANSMITTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $31.50 IN FAVOR OF ROYCE J. TIPTON, REPRESENTING 3 1/2 DAYS PER DIEM IN LIEU OF SUBSISTENCE.
MR. TIPTON OF DENVER, COLORADO, ENTERED INTO A CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT ON APRIL 3, 1952, IN WHICH HE AGREED TO PERFORM CERTAIN SERVICES FROM TIME TO TIME AS REQUIRED BY THE UNITED STATES COMMISSIONER AS CONSULTANT ON ENGINEERING MATTERS FOR WHICH HE WAS TO BE PAID $100 A DAY FOR ALL DAYS NECESSARILY ENGAGED ON THE WORK OF THAT COMMISSION, THE TIME SPENT IN TRAVEL IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH DUTIES TO BE COMPENSATED FOR AS WORKING TIME, EXCLUDING SUNDAYS.
IT APPEARS THAT MR. TIPTON WAS IN WASHINGTON, D.C., WHEN HE RECEIVED NOTICE FROM THE COMMISSION REQUESTING HIS PRESENCE AT MEETINGS IN EL PASO, TEXAS, DECEMBER 5, 16, AND 17, 1954. HE USED A GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION REQUEST FOR TRANSPORTATION FROM WASHINGTON, D.C., TO EL PASO, AND RETURN TO DENVER AT A COST OF $141.75, AS COMPARED WITH $90.80 FOR ROUND TRIP BETWEEN DENVER AND EL PASO. THE PER DIEM IN LIEU OF SUBSISTENCE WOULD HAVE BEEN PAYABLE FOR 3 1/2 DAYS IN EITHER CASE, SO YOUR DOUBT IN THE MATTER IS NOT WHETHER THE AMOUNT OF PER DIEM IS CORRECT BUT WHETHER THE EXCESS TRANSPORTATION COST SHOULD BE APPLIED AGAINST THE SUBSISTENCE PER DIEM OTHERWISE DUE.
THE TRAVEL ORDER ISSUED TO MR. TIPTON AUTHORIZED TRAVEL "AS MAY BE DIRECTED" BY THE COMMISSIONER, AND FURTHER AUTHORIZED TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES "WHEN ABSENT FROM DENVER, COLORADO, ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS" OF THE COMMISSION. WE FIND NO REQUIREMENT IN THE CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT, OR IN THE TRAVEL ORDER THAT THE TRAVEL ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS IS TO BE RECKONED ONLY FROM DENVER. FROM THE TIME HE LEFT WASHINGTON, D.C., FOR EL PASO, MR. TIPTON WAS TRAVELING ON THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER AND ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS OF THE COMMISSION AWAY FROM DENVER. ACCORDINGLY, HE WAS ENTITLED TO USE A GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION REQUEST FOR SUCH TRANSPORTATION, WITHOUT REGARD TO THE ESTIMATED COST HAD THE TRAVEL BEEN FROM DENVER. COMPARE 24 COMP. GEN. 546.
THE VOUCHER, WHICH IS RETURNED HEREWITH, MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT, WITHOUT DEDUCTION OF THE REFERRED-TO EXCESS TRANSPORTATION COSTS.