Claim for Constructive Costs of Travel

GAO was asked whether an Assistant U.S. Attorney may be allowed additional reimbursement for temporary duty travel. The amount in question represented the difference that resulted from computing the constructive cost of air travel based upon standard coach fare as compared with the lower cost of economy fare accomodations. The record showed that the attorney was authorized roundtrip travel via a common carrier. However, for reasons of personal preference, the attorney traveled by privately owned vehicle. Subsequently, he claimed reimbursement for the constructive cost of commercial air travel at the regular rate for coach class accommodations. Because employees of the U.S. Attorney's Office were advised by memorandum that air travel was to be performed using economy fare accommodations, the agency allowed payment of that portion of the employee's claim which represented the constructive cost of air travel at the economy fare rate. The employee, however, contended that this restriction of his reimbursement for travel expenses was improper under agency regulations which prescribe the manner in which constructive costs are determined and because he believed that accommodations at the economy fare rates would not have been available had he traveled by commercial air carrier. GAO held that the agency's memorandum was in accordance with Federal Travel Regulations, which state that the total allowable reimbursement will be limited to the total constructive cost of appropriate common carrier transportation. Additionally, special discount fares are to be used for computing reimbursement for official travel whenever it is practical and economical, irregardless of whether space would have been available had the traveler used a commercial air carrier. The agency, therefore, properly restricted reimbursement for mileage to the constructive cost of accommodations at the economy fare rate, and the claim was disallowed.