B-147978, FEB. 16, 1962

B-147978: Feb 16, 1962

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

TO BE 225 MILES AND REIMBURSEMENT WAS MADE ON THAT BASIS. YOUR RECLAIM BASED UPON 314 ADDITIONAL MILES WAS DISALLOWED. YOU SAY ONE OF YOUR PASSENGERS WAS A NATIVE OF THE AREA IN WHICH THE TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED AND UPON YOUR REQUEST HE SELECTED THE ROUTE YOU FOLLOWED. ARE THE MOST USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTES.'. THE TRAVEL OF EMPLOYEES ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS IS GOVERNED BY THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. SECTION 1.1 PROVIDES THAT SUCH PERSONS ARE EXPECTED TO EXERCISE THE SAME CARE IN INCURRING EXPENSES THAT A PRUDENT PERSON WOULD EXERCISE IF TRAVELING ON PERSONAL BUSINESS. SECTION 3.2 OF THE REGULATIONS REQUIRES THAT ALL TRAVEL BE PERFORMED OVER USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTES AND ANY EXTRA EXPENSES INCURRED BY REASON OF THE USE OF INDIRECT ROUTES MUST BE BORNE BY THE TRAVELER UNLESS THE OFFICIAL NECESSITY THEREFOR IS ESTABLISHED.

B-147978, FEB. 16, 1962

TO MR. LEWIS G. CERRONE:

YOUR UNDATED LETTER, FILE REFERENCE ORDBA-3600, RECEIVED HERE JANUARY 10, 1962, REQUESTS REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF OCTOBER 9, 1961, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR $25.12, REPRESENTING ADDITIONAL MILEAGE INCIDENT TO TRAVEL PERFORMED AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY.

TRAVEL ORDER DATED MAY 9, 1961, AUTHORIZED YOU TO PROCEED BY PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE FROM PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA, TO PICATINNY ARSENAL, DOVER, NEW JERSEY, THENCE TO NORTH DEPOT ACTIVITY, ROMULUS, NEW YORK, AND RETURN TO PHILADELPHIA. THE ORDER SPECIFIED REIMBURSEMENT AT 8 CENTS PER MILE.

AFTER PERFORMING THE TRAVEL YOU CLAIMED REIMBURSEMENT FOR 382 MILES EACH WAY FOR THAT PART OF THE TRIP BETWEEN DOVER AND ROMULUS. THE RAND MCNALLY STANDARD HIGHWAY MILEAGE GUIDE SHOWS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN DOVER AND ROMULUS VIA NETCONG, NEW JERSEY, AND ITHACA, NEW YORK, TO BE 225 MILES AND REIMBURSEMENT WAS MADE ON THAT BASIS. YOUR RECLAIM BASED UPON 314 ADDITIONAL MILES WAS DISALLOWED.

YOU SAY ONE OF YOUR PASSENGERS WAS A NATIVE OF THE AREA IN WHICH THE TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED AND UPON YOUR REQUEST HE SELECTED THE ROUTE YOU FOLLOWED. YOU ALSO POINT OUT THAT "THRUWAYS, TURNPIKES, ETC., ARE THE MOST USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTES.'

THE TRAVEL OF EMPLOYEES ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS IS GOVERNED BY THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. SECTION 1.1 PROVIDES THAT SUCH PERSONS ARE EXPECTED TO EXERCISE THE SAME CARE IN INCURRING EXPENSES THAT A PRUDENT PERSON WOULD EXERCISE IF TRAVELING ON PERSONAL BUSINESS. FURTHERMORE, SECTION 3.2 OF THE REGULATIONS REQUIRES THAT ALL TRAVEL BE PERFORMED OVER USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTES AND ANY EXTRA EXPENSES INCURRED BY REASON OF THE USE OF INDIRECT ROUTES MUST BE BORNE BY THE TRAVELER UNLESS THE OFFICIAL NECESSITY THEREFOR IS ESTABLISHED.

HERE, THE ROUTE FOLLOWED BETWEEN DOVER AND ROMULUS REQUIRED APPROXIMATELY 70 PERCENT MORE MILES OF TRAVEL THAN THE ROUTE VIA NETCONG AND ITHACA. OFFICIAL NECESSITY FOR THE USE OF SUCH A ROUTE HAS BEEN SHOWN THAT WOULD JUSTIFY CHARGING THE EXTRA COST TO THE GOVERNMENT. THE FACT THAT EMPLOYEES AT PICATINNY ARSENAL MAY HAVE BEEN REIMBURSED FOR SUCH ROUTING IS A MATTER FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE AUDIT OF THE ACCOUNTS AND CAN HAVE NO BEARING ON YOUR ENTITLEMENT.

CONCERNING YOUR FINAL STATEMENT, WE KNOW OF NO REGULATION WHICH REQUIRES THAT CONFLICTS BETWEEN THE TRAVELER AND THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY BE RESOLVED IN FAVOR OF THE EMPLOYEE; NEITHER ARE WE AWARE OF ANY STATUTE UPON WHICH SUCH A REGULATION COULD BE BASED.

YOU HAVE BEEN REIMBURSED TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. THEREFORE THE SETTLEMENT OF OCTOBER 9, 1961, IS SUSTAINED.