B-161873, FEB 22, 1971

B-161873, FEB 22, 1971

TRAVEL EXPENSES - ILLNESS - OTHER THAN EMPLOYEE DECISION DENYING PAYMENT OF A RECLAIM VOUCHER FOR $120 IN FAVOR OF DR. HERBERT W. JACKSON FOR RETURN FARE FROM SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., TO CINCINNATI, OHIO. AN EMPLOYEE WHO UPON ARRIVAL AT HIS TEMPORARY DUTY STATION - A SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE - IS TOLD TO ABANDON HIS OFFICIAL TRAVEL DUE TO A DEATH IN HIS FAMILY AND IS FREE TO PROCEED TO WHERE HE IS NEEDED (NEW HAMPSHIRE) AT HIS OWN DISCRETION IS NOT ENTITLED TO THE TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES HE WOULD HAVE INCURRED IN RETURNING TO HIS HEADQUARTERS. THE RULE ANNOUNCED IN B-161873, JULY 18, 1967, 47 COMP. GEN. 59 IS FOR APPLICATION AND THE VOUCHER MAY NOT BE CERTIFIED.

TO MR. OSCAR K. RODGERS:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 22, 1970, REQUESTING OUR ADVANCE DECISION AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF PAYING A RECLAIM VOUCHER, ENCLOSED, FOR $120 IN FAVOR OF DR. HERBERT W. JACKSON FOR RETURN FARE FROM SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, TO CINCINNATI, OHIO.

IT APPEARS THAT ON JANUARY 27, 1970, DR. JACKSON DEPARTED FROM CINCINNATI FOR SAN FRANCISCO ON OFFICIAL ORDERS TO ATTEND A TRAINING COURSE ENTITLED "POLLUTION OF COASTAL AND ESTUARINE WATERS" OFFERED BY THE CONTINUING EDUCATION IN ENGINEERING, UNIVERSITY EXTENSION, AND THE COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA TO BE CONDUCTED AT THE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION CENTER, SAN FRANCISCO, FROM JANUARY 28-30, 1970. THE EMPLOYEE STATES THAT HE WAS TO ATTEND WITH THE DOUBLE OBJECTIVE OF CAREER DEVELOPMENT AND TO OBTAIN INFORMATION ON THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS IN THE FIELD OF NONGOVERNMENTAL SOURCES FOR POSSIBLE USE IN THE TRAINING PROGRAM.

DR. JACKSON WAS PAGED ON ARRIVAL AT THE SAN FRANCISCO AIRPORT BY HIS HOME OFFICE IN CINCINNATI AND INFORMED OF HIS FATHER'S DEATH IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. THE FUNERAL WAS ON THURSDAY, THE 29TH, AND HIS PRESENCE WAS SERIOUSLY NEEDED BY HIS FAMILY IN THE INTERIM. HE STATES THAT HE WAS INFORMED BY HIS HOME OFFICE THAT ALL ARRANGEMENTS FOR HIS ATTENDANCE AT THE COURSE HAD BEEN CANCELLED ON INSTRUCTIONS FROM HIS SUPERVISOR AND THAT HE WAS FREE TO PROCEED TO NEW HAMPSHIRE AT HIS OWN DISCRETION.

THE EMPLOYEE INDICATES THAT HE PURCHASED A TICKET ON TWA FLIGHT 76 LEAVING SAN FRANCISCO AT 2:30 P.M. LOCAL TIME, FLYING NONSTOP TO BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, WHERE HE ARRIVED AT 10:30 P.M. LOCAL TIME; AND THAT HE RETURNED THE UNUSED TICKET (PROCURED ON A GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION REQUEST) FROM SAN FRANCISCO TO CINCINNATI TO THE GOVERNMENT, HAVING PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED THE RETURN RESERVATION FOR SATURDAY, JANUARY 31.

AS INDICATED IN YOUR LETTER WE HAVE HELD THAT AN EMPLOYEE WHO UPON ARRIVAL AT HIS TEMPORARY DUTY STATION ABANDONS HIS OFFICIAL TRAVEL DUE TO A DEATH IN HIS FAMILY IS NOT ENTITLED TO THE TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES IN RETURNING TO HIS HEADQUARTERS. 47 COMP. GEN. 59 (1967), B- 158442, FEBRUARY 15, 1966, COPY HEREWITH. WE SEE NO REASON WHY THAT RULE SHOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE HERE. ACCORDINGLY, THE EMPLOYEE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST OF TRAVEL FROM SAN FRANCISCO TO CINCINNATI.

THE VOUCHER WHICH IS RETURNED HEREWITH MAY NOT BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT.