B-156536, MAY 6, 1965

B-156536: May 6, 1965

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

CONCERNING YOUR AUTHORITY TO REIMBURSE TWO EMPLOYEES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY THE COST THEY INCURRED IN RENTING CARS WHILE ON TEMPORARY DUTY WHEN SUCH CARS WERE HELD LONGER THAN WAS REQUIRED BY OFFICIAL BUSINESS FOR REASONS PERSONAL TO THE EMPLOYEES CONCERNED. YOU HAVE FORWARDED THE SUPPLEMENTAL CLAIMS SUBMITTED BY TWO EMPLOYEES WHICH INVOLVE SIMILAR QUESTIONS. THE FIRST CLAIM IS THAT OF MICHAEL T. THE RATES APPLIED FOR THE CAR RENTAL IN QUESTION WERE. SINCE THE BASIC RENTAL FEE AND THE COLLISION DAMAGE WAIVER FEE WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SAME FOR 5 DAYS AS THEY WERE FOR 6 DAYS THE COST OF THOSE ITEMS WAS NOT INCREASED BY REASON OF THE FACT THAT MR. IN MAKING REIMBURSEMENT ON HIS ORIGINAL VOUCHER DEDUCTIONS FROM THE TOTAL RENTAL CHARGE WERE MADE FOR ONE DAY'S BASIC RENTAL FEE.

B-156536, MAY 6, 1965

TO MR. R. G. PISTNER, U.S. NAVY FINANCE CENTER:

WE REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 31, 1965, YOUR REFERENCE FP30 (LEH: JK) 4650/B) (G), CONCERNING YOUR AUTHORITY TO REIMBURSE TWO EMPLOYEES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY THE COST THEY INCURRED IN RENTING CARS WHILE ON TEMPORARY DUTY WHEN SUCH CARS WERE HELD LONGER THAN WAS REQUIRED BY OFFICIAL BUSINESS FOR REASONS PERSONAL TO THE EMPLOYEES CONCERNED.

YOU HAVE FORWARDED THE SUPPLEMENTAL CLAIMS SUBMITTED BY TWO EMPLOYEES WHICH INVOLVE SIMILAR QUESTIONS. THE FIRST CLAIM IS THAT OF MICHAEL T. BRODSKY, AN EMPLOYEE STATIONED IN WASHINGTON, D.C., WHO RENTED A CAR AS AUTHORIZED IN HIS TRAVEL ORDER WHILE ON TEMPORARY DUTY IN SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. HE USED THE RENTED CAR ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS FROM MONDAY, JANUARY 11, 1965, THROUGH FRIDAY, JANUARY 15. INSTEAD OF TURNING IN THE CAR AND LEAVING SAN FRANCISCO ON SATURDAY MORNING MR. BRODSKY REMAINED THERE AND RETAINED THE CAR FOR PERSONAL REASONS UNTIL SUNDAY, JANUARY 17, RETURNING TO WASHINGTON ON THAT DAY.

THE RATES APPLIED FOR THE CAR RENTAL IN QUESTION WERE, $10 PER DAY OR $50 PER WEEK BASIC RENTAL FEE, $1 PER DAY OR $5 PER WEEK COLLISION DAMAGE WAIVER FEE, AND 10 CENTS PER MILE, LESS A 20 PERCENT DISCOUNT ON THE BASIC RENTAL AND MILEAGE CHARGES. SINCE THE BASIC RENTAL FEE AND THE COLLISION DAMAGE WAIVER FEE WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SAME FOR 5 DAYS AS THEY WERE FOR 6 DAYS THE COST OF THOSE ITEMS WAS NOT INCREASED BY REASON OF THE FACT THAT MR. BRODSKY RETAINED THE CAR FROM SATURDAY MORNING TO SUNDAY MORNING. HE, THEREFORE, CLAIMED REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE FULL BASIC RENTAL FEE AND THE FULL COLLISION DAMAGE WAIVER FEE HE HAD PAID TO THE CAR RENTAL COMPANY. HE DID NOT CLAIM REIMBURSEMENT FOR MILEAGE CHARGES, AT 8 CENTS PER MILE, FOR THE 100 MILES HE DROVE ON PERSONAL BUSINESS. IN MAKING REIMBURSEMENT ON HIS ORIGINAL VOUCHER DEDUCTIONS FROM THE TOTAL RENTAL CHARGE WERE MADE FOR ONE DAY'S BASIC RENTAL FEE, $8, FOR ONE DAY'S COLLISION DAMAGE WAIVER FEE, $1 AND FOR MILEAGE, 100 MILES AT 10 CENTS PER MILE, $10. MR. BRODSKY HAS SUBMITTED A RECLAIM VOUCHER FOR THE BALANCE OF $11.

THE OTHER VOUCHER YOU ENCLOSED CONCERNS THE REIMBURSEMENT OF MR. ROBERT T. GORMAN, AN EMPLOYEE STATIONED IN PORT HUENEME, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE COST OF RENTING A CAR AS AUTHORIZED IN HIS TRAVEL ORDER WHILE ON 3 DAYS TEMPORARY DUTY IN SAN FRANCISCO. MR. GORMAN FINISHED WORK IN SAN FRANCISCO AT 4:30 P.M. JANUARY 27, 1965, AND INSTEAD OF RETURNING IMMEDIATELY TO HIS PERMANENT DUTY STATION HE REMAINED OVERNIGHT IN SAN FRANCISCO RETAINING THE RENTED CAR AND DRIVING 52 MILES ON PERSONAL BUSINESS. HE TURNED THE CAR IN ON THE MORNING OF JANUARY 28 AND WAS CHARGED AT THE SAME RATES AS WERE APPLICABLE TO MR. BRODSKY'S RENTAL. THE BASIC RENTAL FEE AND THE COLLISION DAMAGE WAIVER FEE WERE NOT INCREASED BECAUSE HE KEPT THE CAR FROM THE EVENING OF JANUARY 27 TO THE MORNING OF JANUARY 28. THE ONLY ADDITIONAL COST CHARGED MR. GORMAN BY THE CAR RENTAL COMPANY BY REASON OF HIS PERSONAL USE THEREOF WAS THE MILEAGE FEE APPLICABLE TO THE 52 MILES HE DROVE ON PERSONAL BUSINESS. MR. GORMAN HAS NOT BEEN REIMBURSED FOR ANY OF THE COSTS INVOLVED IN THE CAR RENTAL IN QUESTION AND HAS SUBMITTED A VOUCHER FOR REPAYMENT OF THE TOTAL CHARGE LESS $5.20 FOR THE 52 MILES HE DROVE ON PERSONAL BUSINESS AT 10 CENTS PER MILE.

YOU ASK THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS WITH REGARD TO THE PAYMENT OF THE VOUCHERS IN QUESTION.

"ADVANCE DECISION IS RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED AS TO WHETHER PERSONAL MILEAGE SHOULD BE DEDUCTED AT THE FULL RATE OR AT THE DISCOUNTED RATE; ALSO, AS TO WHETHER OR NOT A PORTION OF THE RENTAL FEE AND INSURANCE FEE SHOULD BE DEDUCTED FOR THE DAY OF PERSONAL USE WHEN NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE GOVERNMENT IS INCURRED. SHOULD DEDUCTION OF THESE FEES BE MADE ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS?

WE HAVE HELD THAT THE GOVERNMENT NEED NOT CLAIM AGAINST AN EMPLOYEE A PRO RATA SHARE OF A SAVINGS IN TRANSPORTATION COST WHICH RESULTED SOLELY FROM THE FACT THAT THE EMPLOYEE PERFORMED SOME PERSONAL TRAVEL IN ADDITION TO THE OFFICIAL TRAVEL REQUIRED. IN SUCH CASES WE HAVE HELD THAT THE EMPLOYEE SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO PAY ONLY THE ADDITIONAL COST WHICH WAS INCURRED BY REASON OF HIS PERSONAL TRAVEL. 35 COMP. GEN. 609; 33 ID. 434. SINCE THE EMPLOYEES HERE IN QUESTION WERE NOT REQUIRED TO PAY ANY ADDITIONAL BASIC RENTAL FEE OR COLLISION DAMAGE WAIVER FEE BY REASON OF THE FACT THAT THEY RETAINED THE RENTAL CARS FOR PERSONAL REASONS BEYOND THE TIME REQUIRED FOR PERFORMANCE OF OFFICIAL BUSINESS WE SEE NO REASON TO CHARGE THEM FOR A PART OF SUCH FEES.

REGARDING THE RATE AT WHICH PERSONAL MILEAGE SHOULD BE DEDUCTED FROM THE TOTAL COST OF THE CAR RENTAL, IT APPEARS THAT THE 20 PERCENT DISCOUNT WAS APPLIED BY THE CAR RENTAL COMPANY TO ALL MILEAGE CHARGES AS WELL AS TO THE FLAT DAILY FEE. THUS, THE REAL MILEAGE CHARGE WAS 8 CENTS PER MILE WHICH SHOULD BE USED IN DEDUCTING FOR THE MILEAGE TRAVELED ON PERSONAL BUSINESS.

FOR THE REASONS STATED THE VOUCHERS PRESENTED ARE RETURNED HEREWITH AND MAY BE PAID IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.