B-210244, Oct 27, 1988

B-210244, Oct 27, 1988

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL - Relocation - Temporary quarters - Actual subsistence expenses - Dependents Eligibility DIGEST: Subsistence expenses of wife of U.S. Customs Service employee being transferred to Rome, Italy, are not payable where wife attended language classes along with the employee at a temporary duty station in Rosslyn, Virginia, and the expense of her tuition was borne by the government. Employee claims that even with paying her subsistence expenses the government would still be saving money since, had she not attended the classes she would have had to establish temporary quarters in Rome and the government would have been liable for the maintenance of two temporary households. The fact that a course of action saves the government money does not serve to create an entitlement not authorized by law. Without authority, of which none has been found, the payment may not be made.

Peter J. Dispenzirie - Spouse's Subsistence Expenses While Attending Foreign Service Institute:

Mr. Peter J. Dispenzirie, an employee of the U.S. Customs Service, Department of the Treasury, appeals our Claims Group's denial of his claim for reimbursement of subsistence expenses incurred by his wife while attending a language course at the Foreign Service Institute (FSI), Rosslyn, Virginia. We sustain the Claims Group's denial.

Mr. Dispenzirie, in 1984, accepted reassignment from Chicago, Illinois, to Rome, Italy, to become Customs Attache. Apparently, prior to assuming his duties in Rome, Mr. Dispenzirie attended language classes in temporary duty status at the FSI. His attendance in language classes was stipulated in the reassignment agreement and subsequently approval for his spouse to attend those classes was also received. Mr. and Mrs. Dispenzirie attended the language classes at FSI from August 17, 1984, through January 11, 1985. While the expense of Mrs. Dispenzirie's tuition at FSI was borne by the government, the $3,488.50 claim for her subsistence expenses (primarily meals) while attending the class has not been paid.

The claimant's main contention is that had his wife not attended the classes she would have had to establish temporary quarters in Rome, and the government would have been liable for the maintenance of two temporary households. Because of this, it is contended, the government actually is saving money. We consistently have held, however, that the fact that a course of action saves the government money does not serve to create an entitlement not authorized by law. Jack P. Collins, B-190108, Feb. 13, 1978.

There is statutory authority under which the FSI may provide language training to an employee's spouse in anticipation of the employee's assignment abroad. 22 U.S.C. Sec. 2024(c). However, we have been unable to find authority, nor has any been cited to us, enabling the agency to pay a spouse's subsistence expenses in a situation such as this. Without such authority, payment of Mrs. Dispenzirie's expenses may not be made. Cf. 55 Comp.Gen. 1332, 1336 (1976), to the same effect regarding dependents' travel expenses. The fact that had Mrs. Dispenzirie followed a different course the agency may have incurred other expenses is irrelevant.

The disallowance of the claim by our Claims Group is, therefore, sustained.