FEBRUARY 3, 1923, 2 COMP. GEN. 473
Highlights
SUBSISTENCE - MEALS UNNECESSARILY TAKEN EN ROUTE - PER DIEM ALLOWANCE ON SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS SPENT AT HOME THE INCONVENIENCE OF A REASONABLE ADVANCE OF THE DINNER HOUR AT THE HOME OF AN EMPLOYEE IS NOT SUCH AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE AS TO ENTITLE SUCH EMPLOYEE TO REIMBURSEMENT FOR MEALS TAKEN EN ROUTE WHICH SHOULD OR MIGHT HAVE BEEN TAKEN BEFORE LEAVING HIS POST OF DUTY. WHEN AN EMPLOYEE IN A TRAVEL STATUS FOR A PERIOD OF TIME COVERING SUNDAYS OR HOLIDAYS SPENDS SUCH SUNDAYS OR HOLIDAYS AT HIS OWN HOME HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO A PER DIEM IN LIEU OF SUBSISTENCE FOR THOSE DAYS. WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY. EMPLOYEE STATES HE WAS ENGAGED ON GOVERNMENT BUSINESS UNTIL 5:45 P.M. " AND ALSO FURTHER STATES: IT IS TRUE I COULD HAVE DISARRANGED MY FAMILY AFFAIRS AND CHANGED THE REGULAR DINNER HOUR.
FEBRUARY 3, 1923, 2 COMP. GEN. 473
SUBSISTENCE - MEALS UNNECESSARILY TAKEN EN ROUTE - PER DIEM ALLOWANCE ON SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS SPENT AT HOME THE INCONVENIENCE OF A REASONABLE ADVANCE OF THE DINNER HOUR AT THE HOME OF AN EMPLOYEE IS NOT SUCH AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE AS TO ENTITLE SUCH EMPLOYEE TO REIMBURSEMENT FOR MEALS TAKEN EN ROUTE WHICH SHOULD OR MIGHT HAVE BEEN TAKEN BEFORE LEAVING HIS POST OF DUTY. WHEN AN EMPLOYEE IN A TRAVEL STATUS FOR A PERIOD OF TIME COVERING SUNDAYS OR HOLIDAYS SPENDS SUCH SUNDAYS OR HOLIDAYS AT HIS OWN HOME HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO A PER DIEM IN LIEU OF SUBSISTENCE FOR THOSE DAYS.
DECISION BY COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL, FEBRUARY 3, 1923:
DON C. FEES, DISBURSING CLERK, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, JANUARY 9, 1923, REQUESTED REVIEW OF THE FOLLOWING VOUCHERS DISALLOWED IN SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE, JUDICIAL, 12342, DATED NOVEMBER 1, 1922, WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY, AS FOLLOWS:
VOUCHER 16. A. H. MCCORMICK, NO. 10697, PAID MAR. 10, DINNER MAR. 6. LEFT HEADQUARTERS 7 P.M. NOT SHOWN THAT UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES MADE IT NECESSARY FOR EMPLOYEE TO TAKE MEAL EN ROUTE. EMPLOYEE STATES HE WAS ENGAGED ON GOVERNMENT BUSINESS UNTIL 5:45 P.M. IN DEPT. THIS CIRCUMSTANCE DOES NOT NEGATIVE THE POSSIBILITY OF TAKING DINNER AT HEADQUARTERS BEFORE DEPARTURE. SEE 1 COMP. GEN. 390. $1.25.
IN EXPLANATION OF THE NECESSITY OF THIS CHARGE, MR. MCCORMICK STATES: "LEFT OFFICE 5:45 P.M.; HOME IN CHEVY CHASE; DINNER HOUR 6:15 P.M., " AND ALSO FURTHER STATES:
IT IS TRUE I COULD HAVE DISARRANGED MY FAMILY AFFAIRS AND CHANGED THE REGULAR DINNER HOUR, LEFT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AT AN EARLY HOUR, TO THE NEGLECT OF GOVERNMENT BUSINESS, TAKEN DINNER AT HOME, AND TAKEN THE 7 O-CLOCK TRAIN OR PROVIDE A SECOND DINNER FOR MYSELF AT A RESTAURANT AND CAUGHT THE 7 O-CLOCK TRAIN.
IT HAS BEEN THE RULE OF THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS THAT MEALS TAKEN EN ROUTE WHICH SHOULD OR MIGHT HAVE BEEN TAKEN BEFORE LEAVING A POST OF DUTY ARE REIMBURSABLE ONLY WHEN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES MAKE IT IMPRACTICABLE FOR THE OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE TO TAKE THE MEALS AT HIS POST OF DUTY AND FULL EXPLANATION OF SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES IS FURNISHED. 1 COMP. GEN., 390. IT IS NOT SHOWN THAT THE EMPLOYEE REMAINED IN THE DEPARTMENT UNTIL 5:45 P.M. UPON WORK NECESSARY TO THE TRAVEL TO BE PERFORMED. THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED DISCLOSES THE CIRCUMSTANCES RELIED UPON TO BE NOT IMPRACTICABILITY, SUCH AS HAVE MET WITH APPROVAL OF THIS OFFICE, 7 MS. COMP. GEN., 1608, MARCH 25, 1922, BUT APPARENTLY A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE OF THE EMPLOYEE AND DISINCLINATION TO MEET AN ORDINARY SITUATION BY A REASONABLE ADVANCE OF THE DINNER HOUR USUALLY TO BE ARRANGED IN THE AVERAGE HOME. THEREFORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FACTS DISCLOSED, THE CHARGE FOR THIS MEAL DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE AN EXPENSE NECESSARILY INCIDENT TO THE TRAVEL UNDERTAKEN, AND ACCORDINGLY THE DISALLOWANCE OF $1.25 IS AFFIRMED.
VOUCHER 762, F. C. TUKEY, NO. 11479, PAID MARCH 24. PER DIEMS IN LIEU OF SUBSISTENCE, JAN. 1 AND 2, 1922, WHILE AT HOME AND NOT ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS, NOT ALLOWABLE. SEE 21 COMP. DEC., 785, AND 27 COMP. DEC., 981. DISALLOWED, $8.00.
THE VOUCHER DISCLOSES THAT MR. TUKEY, A SPECIAL AGENT, WAS TRAVELING IN OHIO, SUPPOSEDLY ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS, AND THAT FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY 1 TO 31 HE CHARGES AND IS PAID SUBSISTENCE FOR 31 DAYS, AT $4 PER DAY; TOTAL, $124; YET A PREAMBLE TO THE STATEMENT OF EXPENSES STATES:
AT THE CLOSE OF BUSINESS DECEMBER 31ST I WAS ON OFFICIAL DUTIES AT LIMA, O.; ON JANUARY 1ST AND 2D I WAS NOT IN LIMA, BUT AWAY FROM THAT CITY ON PERSONAL MATTERS. I RETURNED TO OFFICIAL DUTIES AT CECIL, O., AT 6:00 A.M., JANUARY 3RD.
THE ALLOWANCE FOR SUBSISTENCE IS TO REIMBURSE HIM FOR THE ADDED EXPENSE WHICH A TRAVELER INCURS WHEN TRAVELING AWAY FROM HOME OR DESIGNATED HEADQUARTERS. IF THE EMPLOYEE IS AT HIS HOME THE REASON FOR THE ALLOWANCE NO LONGER EXISTS, AND WHEN HE TRAVELS TO OR REMAINS AT HIS HOME FOR PERSONAL REASONS HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO ANY EXPENSE OR PER DIEM FOR ANY PORTION OF THE TIME THUS CONSUMED. 27 COMP. DEC., 982. IT IS IMMATERIAL THAT THE 1ST AND 2D OF JANUARY WERE HOLIDAYS, AS THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE AGENT WAS NOT IN A TRAVEL STATUS, AND THAT IS THE BASIS UPON WHICH HIS RIGHTS REST, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACT OF APRIL 6, 1914, 38 STAT., 318, WHICH PROVIDES THAT:
ON AND AFTER JULY FIRST, NINETEEN HUNDRED AND FOURTEEN, UNLESS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY PROVIDED BY LAW, NO OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE OF THE UNITED STATES SHALL BE ALLOWED OR PAID ANY SUM IN EXCESS OF EXPENSES ACTUALLY INCURRED FOR SUBSISTENCE WHILE TRAVELING ON DUTY OUTSIDE OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND AWAY FROM HIS DESIGNATED POST OF DUTY, * * *.
UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES THERE IS NO AUTHORITY OF LAW FOR PAYMENT OF PER DIEM FOR THE TWO DAYS IN QUESTION, AND THIS DISALLOWANCE IS AFFIRMED.