B-175627, JUL 5, 1972

B-175627, JUL 5, 1972

CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE - TEMPORARY DUTY - EXCESS TRAVEL TIME - COMPUTATION OF PER DIEM - PROPRIETY OF CHARGE AGAINST LEAVE CONCERNING THE PROPER COMPUTATION OF PER DIEM AND THE PROPRIETY OF CHARGING ANNUAL LEAVE FOR EXCESS TRAVEL TIME IN CONNECTION WITH TEMPORARY DUTY PERFORMED BY WALTER K. TROUGHT, JR., AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER, RICHMOND, VA. (1) UNDER PARAGRAPH C 1051-2 OF JTR, DETERMINATIONS OF WHEN THE SCHEDULING OF TRAVEL WITHIN THE EMPLOYEE'S REGULAR DUTY HOURS IS "PRACTICABLE" ARE GENERALLY AT THE ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION OF THE AGENCY INVOLVED. CONSTRUCTIVE TRAVEL COMPARISON SHOULD BE BASED ON THE SCHEDULE WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN USED IF THE EMPLOYEE HAD ACTUALLY TRAVELED BY AIR. IN THE INSTANT CASE, USE OF THE 10:27 FLIGHT TO DAYTON AND THE NOON FLIGHT BACK TO RICHMOND APPEARS REASONABLE AND WOULD NOT NECESSITATE A CHARGE TO ANNUAL LEAVE, ALTHOUGH ONLY 1/2 DAY PER DIEM AT THE $25 RATE WOULD BE PAYABLE FOR JANUARY 24. (2) PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH C-10156-2, JTR, IT IS PROPER TO PROVIDE FOR TRAVEL TO AND FROM THE TERMINAL, CHECKING-IN, DEPLANING AND BAGGAGE PICK- UP TIMES IN COMPUTING CONSTRUCTIVE PER DIEM COSTS. (3) WITH REGARD TO THE EFFECT ON SCHEDULE SELECTION OF THE AGENCY'S AGREEMENT WITH LOCAL 2047 OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491, DATED AUGUST 26, 1971, PROVIDES THAT ALL SUCH AGREEMENTS ARE SUBJECT TO EXISTING LAWS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS. (4) WHETHER EMPLOYEE LEAVE ACCOUNTS ARE PROPERLY CHARGEABLE FOR PERIODS OF LESS THAN ONE HOUR IS PRIMARILY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION.

TO MR. M. E. SMITH:

THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 29, 1972, REFERENCE DGSC-CF, FORWARDED TO THIS OFFICE ON APRIL 3, 1972, BY THE PER DIEM, TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE COMMITTEE, IN WHICH YOU REQUEST AN ADVANCE DECISION AS TO THE PROPER COMPUTATION OF PER DIEM AND THE PROPRIETY OF A CHARGE AGAINST ANNUAL LEAVE FOR EXCESS TRAVEL TIME IN CONNECTION WITH TEMPORARY DUTY PERFORMED BY AN EMPLOYEE OF YOUR AGENCY.

IT IS INDICATED THAT UNDER TRAVEL ORDER DGSC-43, DATED JANUARY 18, 1972, MR. WALTER K. TROUGHT, JR., AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER, RICHMOND, VIRGINIA, WAS AUTHORIZED TO TRAVEL TO WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, DAYTON, OHIO, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ATTENDING AN ADVANCED PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT COURSE. MR. TROUGHT'S TRAVEL ORDERS PROVIDED FOR TRAVEL BY PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE TO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT JANUARY 24, 1972, WITH MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT AND ALLOWABLE PER DIEM LIMITED TO CONSTRUCTIVE COST AND SCHEDULED TRAVEL TIME BY COMMON CARRIER. MR. TROUGHT LEFT HIS RESIDENCE AT 7:30 A.M. ON JANUARY 24 AND ARRIVED AT THE TEMPORARY DUTY POINT AT 5:30 P.M. THAT EVENING. UPON COMPLETION OF THE TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT, MR. TROUGHT LEFT DAYTON AT 8 A.M. ON FEBRUARY 10, 1972, AND ARRIVED BACK AT HIS RESIDENCE IN RICHMOND AT 6 P.M. THAT SAME DAY. MR. TROUGHT'S NORMAL DUTY HOURS ARE 8 A.M. TO 4:30 P.M.

FOR PURPOSES OF COMPUTING THE CONSTRUCTIVE TRAVEL TIME BY COMMON CARRIER, IT IS INDICATED THAT THE FOLLOWING FLIGHTS BETWEEN RICHMOND AND DAYTON WERE AVAILABLE:

DEPART RICHMOND ARRIVE DAYTON

7:15 A.M. 2:30 P.M. VIA WASHINGTON

8:40 A.M. 2:30 P.M. VIA WASHINGTON

10:27 A.M.2:30 P.M. VIA WASHINGTON

11:00 A.M. 5:05 P.M. VIA DULLES AIRPORT

3:25 P.M. 6:06 P.M. VIA WASHINGTON

3:40 P.M. 9:49 P.M. VIA BALTIMORE

4:56 P.M. 11:03 P.M. VIA WASHINGTON

DEPART DAYTON ARRIVE RICHMOND

8:30 A.M. 1:05 P.M. VIA WASHINGTON

9:40 A.M. 8:32 P.M. VIA DULLES AIRPORT

12:00 NOON 5:58 P.M. VIA WASHINGTON

1:43 P.M. 5:58 P.M. VIA WASHINGTON

5:00 P.M. 10:33 P.M. VIA WASHINGTON

7:55 P.M. 10:33 P.M. VIA WASHINGTON

YOU STATE THAT IN PREPARING MR. TROUGHT'S TRAVEL VOUCHER, FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING CONSTRUCTIVE COST AND PER DIEM AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARAGRAPH C 1051-2 OF THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS (JTR) WHICH REQUIRES OFFICIAL TRAVEL TO BE SCHEDULED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE WITHIN AN EMPLOYEE'S REGULARLY SCHEDULED HOURS OF DUTY, YOU SELECTED THE LAST FLIGHT LEAVING RICHMOND WHICH WOULD RESULT IN AN ARRIVAL AT DAYTON PRIOR TO MR. TROUGHT'S ACTUAL ARRIVAL TIME BY AUTOMOBILE OF 5:30 P.M. THEREFORE, THE 11 A.M. FLIGHT, WHICH WAS SCHEDULED TO ARRIVE IN DAYTON AT 5:05 P.M., WAS SELECTED. USING THIS FLIGHT AS A BASIS FOR CONSTRUCTIVE COMPARISON, AND ALLOWING ONE HOUR FOR TRANSPORTATION TO THE AIRPORT AND CHECKING-IN TIME, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT MR. TROUGHT SHOULD BE CHARGED 2 HOURS ANNUAL LEAVE FOR THE PERIOD BETWEEN 8 A.M. AND 10 A.M. ON JANUARY 24. IN MAKING THE CONSTRUCTIVE COMPARISON FOR THE RETURN TRIP, THE FLIGHT WHICH RESULTED IN THE FIRST DEPARTURE FROM DAYTON SUBSEQUENT TO MR. TROUGHT'S ACTUAL DEPARTURE WAS SELECTED. THIS WAS THE SCHEDULED 8:30 A.M. FLIGHT OUT OF DAYTON, WHICH ARRIVED IN RICHMOND AT 1:05 P.M. ALLOWING ONE HOUR AND 25 MINUTES FOR DEPLANING, BAGGAGE PICK-UP, AND TRANSPORTATION TO THE DUTY STATION, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT ANOTHER 2-HOUR CHARGE AGAINST MR. TROUGHT'S ANNUAL LEAVE WAS IN ORDER FOR FEBRUARY 10. MR. TROUGHT HAS OBJECTED TO THE CHARGE AGAINST HIS ANNUAL LEAVE AND HAS DESIGNATED A LOCAL CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (AFGE) TO ACT ON HIS BEHALF IN HIS ATTEMPTS TO HAVE HIS LEAVE RESTORED. IN THAT REGARD YOU REFER TO SECTION 1 OF ARTICLE XIII OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER AND LOCAL 2047 OF THE AFGE WHICH STATES "WHENEVER POSSIBLE AN EMPLOYEE'S TRAVEL SHOULD BE SCHEDULED WITHIN HIS REGULAR WORK HOURS."

IT IS NOTED THAT ANOTHER EMPLOYEE OF THE DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER TRAVELED AT THE SAME TIME TO THE SAME TEMPORARY DUTY POINT TO ATTEND ANOTHER COURSE OF INSTRUCTION WITH THE SAME SCHEDULE AS MR. TROUGHT'S. THAT EMPLOYEE, WHO USED COMMERCIAL AIR TRANSPORTATION AND WHOSE SCHEDULE OF TRANSPORTATION WAS ADMINISTRATIVELY ARRANGED, DEPARTED RICHMOND AT 3:25 P.M. JANUARY 24 AND ARRIVED AT WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE AT 6:06 P.M. THAT EVENING. IN RETURNING, THE EMPLOYEE DEPARTED DAYTON AT 7:55 P.M. FEBRUARY 9, ARRIVING BACK IN RICHMOND AT 11:35 P.M.

BASED ON THE FOREGOING, YOU HAVE ASKED THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

"(1) HOW SHOULD THE SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTIVE TRAVEL BE SELECTED? SHOULD IT BE THE LAST ONE TO AVOID ENPLANING OR DEPLANING BETWEEN MIDNIGHT AND 0600? SHOULD IT BE THAT LAST ONE TO ARRIVE AT TDY POINT PRIOR TO ACTUAL ARRIVAL OF EMPLOYEE WITH DEPARTURE FOR RETURN TO PDS THE NEXT FLIGHT AFTER ACTUAL DEPARTURE; SHOULD IT, IF SUCH A SCHEDULE EXISTS, PROVIDE FOR TRAVEL ENTIRELY DURING DUTY HOURS; OR SHOULD THE ACTUAL FLIGHTS USED BY ANOTHER EMPLOYEE TRAVELING FOR A SIMILAR PURPOSE ON THE SAME DAY WHO USED COMMERCIAL TRAVEL BE USED?

"(2) WHILE THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, VOLUME II, STATES IN PARAGRAPH C -10156-2 CONSTRUCTIVE SCHEDULED TRAVEL WILL BE USED, THIS CENTER HAS ALLOWED TRAVEL TIME TO THE TERMINAL, CHECKING-IN TIME, DEPLANING TIME, AND BAGGAGE PICK-UP TIME IN ADDITION TO THE SCHEDULE FLIGHT TIME. IS THE PROCEDURE CORRECT OR SHOULD COMPUTATION BE LIMITED TO ACTUAL SCHEDULES ONLY?

"(3) WHAT IMPACT DOES THE QUOTED ARTICLE XIII - TRAVEL OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER, RICHMOND, VIRGINIA AND THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2047, HAVE ON THE SELECTION OF SCHEDULES TO USE IN COMPUTING CONSTRUCTIVE TRAVEL TIME?

"(4) AT DGSC SUPERVISORS MAY EXCUSE AN EMPLOYEE UP TO 59 MINUTES IT IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE GOVERNMENT TO DO SO. IF CONSTRUCTIVE SCHEDULES ARE SUCH THAT EMPLOYEE WOULD BE PRESENT FOR DUTY ONLY PART OF AN HOUR, SHOULD HE BE CONSIDERED AS EXCUSED AND NOT CHARGED LEAVE? IF THE EXCESS TIME IS JUST OVER AN HOUR, IS A TWO HOUR LEAVE CHARGE JUSTIFIABLE?"

THE DETERMINATION TO CHARGE AN EMPLOYEE LEAVE BECAUSE HE TRAVELS BY PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLE WHEN HE COULD HAVE ACCOMPLISHED THE OFFICIAL BUSINESS INVOLVED IN A SHORTER TIME HAD HE TRAVELED BY APPROPRIATE COMMON CARRIER IS A MATTER PRIMARILY WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF THE HEAD OF THE AGENCY CONCERNED. WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY HELD THAT EMPLOYEES WHO USE PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES FOR OFFICIAL TRAVEL WHEN SUCH MODE OF TRAVEL IS NOT TO THE ADVANTAGE OF THE GOVERNMENT ARE SUBJECT TO A LEAVE CHARGE FOR ANY EXCESS TIME INVOLVED. THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE CHARGING OF LEAVE WHEN AN EMPLOYEE DELAYS HIS TRAVEL OR DEVIATES FROM THE DIRECT ROUTE OF TRAVEL FOR PERSONAL REASONS AND IS THEREFORE UNAVAILABLE WHEN HE OTHERWISE WOULD BE FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF OFFICIAL DUTIES. B 155693, JANUARY 11, 1965. SEE ALSO FEDERAL PERSONNEL MANUAL SUPPLEMENT 990-2, PAGE 630-17, WHEREIN IT IS STATED "ABSENCES BECAUSE OF EXCESS TRAVEL TIME RESULTING FROM THE USE OF PRIVATELY OWNED MOTOR VEHICLES FOR PERSONAL REASONS ON OFFICIAL TRIPS IS GENERALLY CHARGEABLE TO ANNUAL LEAVE."

THE ISSUANCE OF TRAVEL ORDERS AND THE CONDITIONS THEREUNDER, INCLUDING THE HOURS OF TRAVEL, PURSUANT TO AUTHORIZING THE PERFORMANCE OF TEMPORARY DUTY IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AGENCY CONCERNED. AS PREVIOUSLY NOTED, THE JTR PROVIDE THAT WHENEVER "PRACTICABLE" OFFICIAL TRAVEL WILL BE SCHEDULED WITHIN AN EMPLOYEE'S REGULARLY SCHEDULED HOURS OF DUTY. THE TERM "PRACTICABLE" AS USED IN PARAGRAPH C 1051-2 IS NOT DEFINED IN 5 U.S.C. 6101(B)(2), THE STATUTE UPON WHICH THE REGULATION IS BASED, OR IN THE JTR. IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A DEFINITION AND IN VIEW OF THE MANY DIFFERENT SITUATIONS WHICH MAY ARISE, A COMPREHENSIVE DEFINITION CANNOT BE GIVEN. THEREFORE, EACH CASE MUST BE TREATED ON THE BASIS OF THE PARTICULAR FACTS INVOLVED. HOWEVER, THE TERM IN ITS ORDINARY SENSE MEANS FEASIBLE OR CAPABLE OF BEING PUT INTO PRACTICE OR ACCOMPLISHED. SCHEDULING DEPARTURE TIMES, THEREFORE, THE AUTHORIZING OFFICIAL MUST DO SO ON THE BASIS OF AGENCY NEEDS COUPLED WITH THE FACTS INVOLVED IN THE PARTICULAR TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT. IN SELECTING A SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTIVE TRAVEL COMPARISONS, THE SCHEDULE SHOULD BE SELECTED ON THE SAME BASIS THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SELECTED HAD THE EMPLOYEE ACTUALLY GONE BY AIR WITHOUT REGARD TO HIS ACTUAL ARRIVAL OR DEPARTURE TIMES BY PRIVATE VEHICLE. IN THIS CASE THE FACT THAT MR. TROUGHT WAS AUTHORIZED TO TRAVEL BY PRIVATE VEHICLE WOULD SEEM TO INDICATE THAT IT WAS NOT REQUIRED THAT HE BE AVAILABLE FOR WORK FOR ANY PART OF THE DAY IN RICHMOND ON JANUARY 24. ACCORDINGLY, IT APPEARS THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRACTICABLE TO SCHEDULE HIS TRAVEL DURING HIS DUTY HOURS HAD HE GONE BY AIR. IN THAT REGARD, ABSENT AN ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION THAT MR. TROUGHT'S PRESENCE IN THE RICHMOND OFFICE WOULD HAVE BEEN NECESSARY, WE DO NOT VIEW IT AS UNREASONABLE FOR A FLIGHT TO BE PICKED FOR CONSTRUCTIVE TRAVEL PURPOSES THAT WOULD GIVE THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT TO THE TRAVELER. WE NOTE THAT THERE WERE FLIGHTS LEAVING RICHMOND AT 8:40 A.M. AND 10:27 A.M., EACH OF WHICH ARRIVED IN DAYTON AT 2:30 P.M. AND EACH OF WHICH WOULD HAVE PROVIDED FOR MR. TROUGHT TO TRAVEL DURING HIS DUTY HOURS. SINCE BOTH ARRIVE AT THE SAME TIME, USE OF THE 10:27 FLIGHT FOR CONSTRUCTIVE TRAVEL PURPOSES WOULD ALLOW MR. TROUGHT TRAVEL TIME TO THE AIRPORT FROM HIS HOME DURING DUTY HOURS AND WOULD NOT HAVE NECESSITATED A CHARGE TO LEAVE AS WAS MADE FOR THE DAY OF DEPARTURE. ONLY 1/2 DAY PER DIEM AT THE $25 RATE WOULD BE PAYABLE FOR JANUARY 24. THERE IS NO INDICATION AS TO THE REASON FOR SCHEDULING THE TRAVEL OF THE OTHER EMPLOYEE AFTER HIS DUTY HOURS, BUT WE SEE NO REASON FOR USING THE FLIGHT TAKEN BY THAT EMPLOYEE AS A BASIS FOR CONSTRUCTIVE TRAVEL COMPARISONS IN MR. TROUGHT'S CASE SINCE OTHER FLIGHTS WERE AVAILABLE, THE USE OF WHICH WOULD HAVE PERMITTED TRAVEL DURING DUTY HOURS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS.

UPON COMPLETION OF THE TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT ON FEBRUARY 10, IT APPEARS THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN REASONABLE FOR THE EMPLOYEE TO HAVE USED THE 12 NOON FLIGHT SINCE THE USE OF THE 8:30 A.M. FLIGHT FROM DAYTON WOULD PROBABLY HAVE REQUIRED A DEPARTURE FROM HIS QUARTERS AT 7 A.M. WE NOTE THAT THE 12 NOON FLIGHT ARRIVED IN RICHMOND AFTER THE EMPLOYEE'S DUTY HOURS. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES THE CHARGE TO MR. TROUGHT OF 2 HOURS ANNUAL LEAVE ON THAT DAY IS VIEWED AS IMPROPER. QUESTION 1 IS ANSWERED ACCORDINGLY.

REGARDING YOUR QUESTION NO. 2, PARAGRAPH C 10156-2 PROVIDES THAT WHEN TRAVEL IS BY PRIVATELY OWNED CONVEYANCE NOT ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT, TRAVEL TIME WILL BE ALLOWED BASED ON THE "CONSTRUCTIVE SCHEDULED TRAVEL TIME OF COMMON CARRIER USED IN COMPUTING PER DIEM (SEE PAR. C 6152) ..." PARAGRAPH C 6152-5 PROVIDES:

"5. LIMITATION ON PER DIEM. THE CONSTRUCTIVE PER DIEM WILL BE LIMITED TO THE AMOUNT OTHERWISE ALLOWABLE IF THE TRAVELER HAD USED THE CARRIER UPON WHICH THE CONSTRUCTIVE TRANSPORTATION COSTS ARE DETERMINED."

PARAGRAPH C 10104 PROVIDES, IN PART:

"FOR COMPUTING PER DIEM ALLOWANCES, OFFICIAL TRAVEL BEGINS AT THE TIME THE TRAVELER LEAVES HIS PLACE OF ABODE, PERMANENT DUTY STATION, OR OTHER POINT OF DEPARTURE AND ENDS WHEN THE TRAVELER RETURNS TO HIS PLACE OF ABODE, PERMANENT DUTY STATION, OR OTHER POINT AT THE CONCLUSION OF HIS TRIP ..."

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS CORRECT TO PROVIDE FOR THE APPROPRIATE TRAVEL TO AND FROM THE TERMINAL, CHECKING-IN, DEPLANING AND BAGGAGE PICK-UP TIMES IN COMPUTING CONSTRUCTIVE PER DIEM COSTS.

AS TO QUESTION NO. 3, THE BASIC POLICIES GOVERNING DEALINGS BETWEEN AGENCIES OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT AND FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND ORGANIZATIONS REPRESENTING SUCH EMPLOYEES ARE OUTLINED IN EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491, PUBLISHED AT 34 FEDERAL REGISTER 17605, AS AMENDED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER 11616, AUGUST 26, 1971, PUBLISHED AT 36 FEDERAL REGISTER 17319. WE NOTE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1 OF ARTICLE XIII OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER AND LOCAL 2047 OF THE AFGE ARE IDENTICAL TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE JTR GOVERNING THE SCHEDULING OF TRAVEL FOR EMPLOYEES WHICH IN TURN IS BASED UPON PROVISIONS OF LAW. SECTION 12 OF E.O. 11491 PROVIDES IN PART:

"SEC. 12. BASIC PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENTS. EACH AGREEMENT BETWEEN AN AGENCY AND A LABOR ORGANIZATION IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS -

"(A) IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF ALL MATTERS COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT, OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES ARE GOVERNED BY EXISTING OR FUTURE LAWS AND THE REGULATIONS OF APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES, INCLUDING POLICIES SET FORTH IN THE FEDERAL PERSONNEL MANUAL; BY PUBLISHED AGENCY POLICIES AND REGULATIONS IN EXISTENCE AT THE TIME THE AGREEMENT WAS APPROVED; AND BY SUBSEQUENTLY PUBLISHED AGENCY POLICIES AND REGULATIONS REQUIRED BY LAW OR BY THE REGULATIONS OF APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES, OR AUTHORIZED BY THE TERMS OF A CONTROLLING AGREEMENT AT A HIGHER AGENCY LEVEL;" NO FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THIS QUESTION APPEARS NECESSARY IN VIEW OF THE DISCUSSION PRECEDING THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 1.

AS TO QUESTION 4, THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF THE POLICY IN REGARD TO EXCUSING EMPLOYEES WITHOUT CHARGE TO LEAVE IS ONE PRIMARILY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION. PERHAPS YOU SHOULD SEEK THE VIEWS OF YOUR CENTRAL INSTALLATION IN REGARD THERETO.

THE VOUCHERS AND RELATED PAPERS ARE RETURNED HEREWITH FOR HANDLING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOREGOING.