YOU AND YOUR IMMEDIATE FAMILY WERE AUTHORIZED TO TRAVEL FROM SAN FRANCISCO. YOU REQUESTED REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE COST OF YOUR WIFE'S ROUND-TRIP TRAVEL BETWEEN NEWARK AND SAN FRANCISCO ($210) ON THE BASIS THAT SUCH TRAVEL WAS SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THE TRAVEL ORDER OF AUGUST 8. IT IS CLEAR THAT NEITHER THE STATUTE NOR THE REGULATIONS CONTEMPLATES REIMBURSEMENT FOR SUCH ROUND-TRIP TRAVEL WHEN PER...

YOU ARE ADVISED THAT UNDER THE LAW THE DECISIONS OF OUR OFFICE ARE FINAL AND CONCLUSIVE UPON THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT. 31 U.S.C. 44 AND 74. WHILE THERE IS NO PROCEDURE FOR APPEALING FROM SUCH DECISIONS. WHICH UNFORTUNATELY WAS MISPLACED BY OUR OFFICE. IS RETURNED HEREWITH. WILL BE APPLIED IN LIQUIDATION OF YOUR INDEBTEDNESS TO THE UNITED STATES...

THE PERTINENT FACTS OF YOUR CASE WERE SET FORTH IN OUR DECISION OF JUNE 24. WE NOTE THAT YOU HAVE SUBMITTED NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOT PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED BY THIS OFFICE. WAS FOR PURPOSES CONTEMPLATED BY SECTION 2.4 OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. THE PURPOSES OF SUCH TRIP WERE TO (1) AVOID THE ADDITIONAL COSTS OF A PRIOR ROUND TRIP OF THE EMPLOYEE AND HIS ABSENCE FROM WORK FOR FIVE DAYS...