B-169538, JUN. 5, 1970
Highlights
A LATER DEPARTURE WAS NOT PRACTICAL.". ON THE BASIS THAT THERE WAS A FLIGHT AVAILABLE DEPARTING DULLES AT 1 P.M. YOU FEEL THAT LATER SUGGESTED FLIGHT WOULD HAVE PROVIDED AN ADEQUATE REST PERIOD PRIOR TO REPORTING FOR TEMPORARY DUTY. HE ARGUES THAT HE WAS TRAVELING ON SUNDAY TO AVOID LOSS OF ONE WORKDAY AND. HE POINTS OUT THAT THE LATER FLIGHT WOULD NOT HAVE PLACED HIM IN SAN FRANCISCO UNTIL 8:31 P.M. THE ELAPSED TIME OF THE EARLIER SCHEDULED TRIP IS ABOUT 2 HOURS LESS THAN THE ONE YOU SUGGEST. IS RETURNED HEREWITH.
B-169538, JUN. 5, 1970
TO MR. ROBERT L. LEITH:
WE REFER FURTHER TO YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 9, 1970, WHICH REQUESTS A DECISION ON THE ALLOWABILITY OF PER DIEM AS CLAIMED BY MR. CHARLES F. EASON, AN EMPLOYEE OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION, INCIDENT TO TRAVEL ON SUNDAY, JANUARY 25, 1970.
ACCORDING TO THE RECORD SUBMITTED, MR. EASON ON AN OFFICIAL TRIP TO THE WEST COAST LEFT DULLES AIRPORT AT 9 A.M. E.S.T. ON SUNDAY, JANUARY 25, 1970, WITH ARRIVAL IN SAN FRANCISCO AT 11:30 A.M. P.S.T. MR. EASON UPON REQUEST STATED THAT "BECAUSE OF THE TIME DIFFERENTIAL, A LATER DEPARTURE WAS NOT PRACTICAL." YOU REDUCED THE AMOUNT OF HIS CLAIMED PER DIEM BY ONE -FOURTH DAY, $6.25, ON THE BASIS THAT THERE WAS A FLIGHT AVAILABLE DEPARTING DULLES AT 1 P.M. E.S.T. WITH ARRIVAL IN SAN FRANCISCO AT 5:31 P.M. P.S.T. SINCE MR. EASON DID NOT REPORT FOR DUTY UNTIL 8:30 A.M. MONDAY, JANUARY 26, YOU FEEL THAT LATER SUGGESTED FLIGHT WOULD HAVE PROVIDED AN ADEQUATE REST PERIOD PRIOR TO REPORTING FOR TEMPORARY DUTY.
MR. EASON BY LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 27, 1970, NOW CLAIMS REIMBURSEMENT OF $6.25. HE ARGUES THAT HE WAS TRAVELING ON SUNDAY TO AVOID LOSS OF ONE WORKDAY AND, THEREFORE, HE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO TRAVEL WITHIN ORDINARY HOURS OF TRAVEL, I.E; 8 A.M. TO 5 P.M. HE POINTS OUT THAT THE LATER FLIGHT WOULD NOT HAVE PLACED HIM IN SAN FRANCISCO UNTIL 8:31 P.M. EASTERN TIME AND WITH AN HOUR NEEDED TO REACH DOWNTOWN FROM THE AIRPORT IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 10 P.M. EASTERN TIME--5 HOURS BEYOND THE NORMAL WORKDAY. ADDITIONALLY MR. EASON URGES THAT A TRAVELER WOULD ON 3,000 MILE TRIP BE EXPECTED TO SELECT THE FASTEST MEANS OF TRAVEL--THE ELAPSED TIME OF THE EARLIER SCHEDULED TRIP IS ABOUT 2 HOURS LESS THAN THE ONE YOU SUGGEST.
IN OUR VIEW THE CIRCUMSTANCES OUTLINED BY THE CLAIMANT IN HIS LETTER OF FEBRUARY 27, 1970, CONSTITUTES A REASONABLE BASIS FOR A DETERMINATION THAT HE ACTED IN A PRUDENT MANNER. SEE SECTION 1.2 OF THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS. THEREFORE, WE WOULD NOT OBJECT TO THE ALLOWANCE OF THE EXTRA PER DIEM HERE INVOLVED. THE CLAIM, WITH ATTACHMENTS, IS RETURNED HEREWITH.