B-175643.OM, APR 27, 1972

B-175643.OM: Apr 27, 1972

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

WE HAVE HELD THAT THE GOVERNMENT NEED NOT CLAIM AGAINST AN EMPLOYEE A PRO RATA SHARE OF SAVINGS IN TRANSPORTATION COSTS 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. IN THE INSTANT CASE SINCE NO ADDITIONAL FEE WAS ASSESSED BECAUSE OF THE USE OF THE RENTAL CAR FOR PERSONAL BUSINESS THE COLLECTION BY THE EMPLOYEE'S AGENCY OF A MILEAGE CHARGE FROM HIM FOR SUCH USE SO AS TO REDUCE THE COST TO THE GOVERNMENT WAS IMPROPER. COMPTROLLER GENERAL HEREWITH IS THE CLAIM OF RICHARD T.

B-175643.OM, APR 27, 1972

PRECIS-UNAVAILABLE

DIRECTOR, TRANSPORTATION AND CLAIMS DIVISION:

RETURNED. WE HAVE HELD THAT THE GOVERNMENT NEED NOT CLAIM AGAINST AN EMPLOYEE A PRO RATA SHARE OF SAVINGS IN TRANSPORTATION COSTS 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 (1956); 33 ID. 434 (1954).

IN THE INSTANT CASE SINCE NO ADDITIONAL FEE WAS ASSESSED BECAUSE OF THE USE OF THE RENTAL CAR FOR PERSONAL BUSINESS THE COLLECTION BY THE EMPLOYEE'S AGENCY OF A MILEAGE CHARGE FROM HIM FOR SUCH USE SO AS TO REDUCE THE COST TO THE GOVERNMENT WAS IMPROPER.

ACCORDINGLY, THE CLAIM MAY BE ALLOWED IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL

HEREWITH IS THE CLAIM OF RICHARD T. BOSWELL FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN RENTAL CAR EXPENSES INCURRED INCIDENT TO HIS TEMPORARY DUTY TRAVEL FROM CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA TO SUNNYVALE, CALIFORNIA, AND RETURN, AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY.

TRAVEL ORDER NO. T-001883171, DATED APRIL 13, 1971, AUTHORIZED RENTAL OF A CAR AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE. THIS TRAVEL ORDER EXPRESSLY STATED THAT, IF FOR ANY REASON THE CAR WAS USED FOR PERSONAL CONVENIENCE, THAT PORTION OF THE COST MUST BE PAID BY THE TRAVELER. AS SHOWN ON INVOICE NO. 23665347, THE CAR WAS RENTED ON A MONTHLY BASIS WITH 3,000 MILES PREPAID. (THIS MEANT THAT NO CHARGE WAS MADE FOR THE NUMBER OF MILES DRIVEN UNLESS THEY EXCEED 3,000). MR. BOSWELL DROVE THE CAR 600 MILES ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS AND 683 MILES FOR HIS OWN PERSONAL CONVENIENCE. WHEN HE SUBMITTED HIS TRAVEL VOUCHER FOR REIMBURSEMENT, THE AMOUNT OF $68.30 WAS DISALLOWED. THIS AMOUNT REPRESENTS THE COST OF THE 683 MILES MR. BOSWELL DROVE THE CAR FOR HIS OWN PERSONAL CONVENIENCE COMPUTED AT THE RATE OF TEN CENTS PER MILE. SINCE MR. BOSWELL USED THE CAR FOR BOTH COMMINGLED PERSONAL AND OFFICIAL USE, HE WAS MADE TO PAY A PORTION OF THE COST OF RENTING THE CAR.

MR. BOSWELL IS NOW RECLAIMING THE AMOUNT DISALLOWED. HE MAINTAINS NO DEDUCTIONS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE FROM HIS TRAVEL VOUCHER AS THE 683 MILES HE DROVE THE CAR FOR HIS OWN PERSONAL CONVENIENCE RESULTED IN NO COSTS TO THE GOVERNMENT IN EXCESS OF WHAT IT WAS ALREADY OBLIGATED TO PAY.

PARAGRAPH C6101-2 OF THE JTR, VOL. 2, STATES THAT SUCH SPECIAL CONVEYANCES (RENTED CARS) WILL BE USED ONLY FOR OFFICIAL BUSINESS UNLESS THE EMPLOYEE BEARS THE EXCESS COSTS OCCASIONED BY SUCH NONOFFICIAL USE.

IN THE PRESENT CASE, NO EXCESS COST WAS OCCASIONED BY THE NONOFFICIAL USE OF THE CAR. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, DOUBT EXISTS AS TO WHETHER RECOVERY FROM THE EMPLOYEE WAS PROPERLY MADE FOR THE MILEAGE DRIVEN FOR HIS PERSONAL CONVENIENCE. THUS THE MATTER IS SUBMITTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND INSTRUCTION.