B-167796, SEP 8, 1969

B-167796, SEP 8, 1969

CIVIL PAY - TRAVEL EXPENSES - INTERRUPTION OF LEAVE FOR TEMPORARY DUTY DECISION TO DISBURSING OFFICER AT SAN FRANCISCO BAY NAVAL SHIPYARD AUTHORIZING PAYMENT FOR CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF EMPLOYEE FROM DALLAS TO SAN FRANCISCO. EMPLOYEE WHO, WHILE ON LEAVE IN DALLAS, TEXAS, WITH HIS FAMILY WAS REQUIRED TO PERFORM TEMPORARY DUTY IN OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA, MAY BE ALLOWED COST OF RETURN AIRPLANE FLIGHT FROM DALLAS TO SAN FRANCISCO VIA OKLAHOMA CITY WITHOUT DEDUCTION FOR CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF TRANSPORTATION FROM DALLAS TO SAN FRANCISCO.

TO MR. G. HOXMEIER:

YOUR LETTER OF JULY 24, 1969, REFERENCE 4650-660, REQUESTS OUR DECISION AS TO WHETHER AN AMOUNT OF $91 SHOULD BE DEDUCTED PRIOR TO PAYMENT OF A TRAVEL VOUCHER IN FAVOR OF MR. PERRY J. HOUGHTON, AN EMPLOYEE OF YOUR AGENCY.

MR. HOUGHTON, WHO WAS ON AUTHORIZED LEAVE FROM APRIL 25 TO MAY 12, 1969, TRAVELED BY PRIVATE AUTO FROM VALLEJO, CALIFORNIA, HIS OFFICIAL STATION, TO DALLAS, TEXAS, WITH HIS FAMILY. WHILE MR. HOUGHTON WAS IN DALLAS AN URGENT NEED AROSE FOR HIS SERVICES IN OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA. IT WAS DETERMINED TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE GOVERNMENT FOR MR. HOUGHTON TO REPORT DIRECT TO OKLAHOMA CITY FROM HIS PLACE OF LEAVE ON MAY 12, 1969. MR. HOUGHTON REPORTED TO OKLAHOMA CITY WHERE HE PERFORMED TEMPORARY DUTY UNTIL MAY 23, 1969. HE DEPARTED FROM OKLAHOMA CITY AT 7 P.M. MAY 23 AND ARRIVED AT SAN FRANCISCO 9:45 P.M. THAT DAY. HIS PER DIEM CLAIM COVERS THE PERIOD ENDING AT MIDNIGHT MAY 23. DUE TO THE LENGTH OF HIS TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT IT WAS NECESSARY FOR HIS FAMILY TO RETURN, BY AUTO, WITHOUT HIM. AN ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION WAS MADE TO ISSUE MR. HOUGHTON A GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION REQUEST AND HE RETURNED FROM OKLAHOMA CITY TO SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, BY AIRPLANE.

YOU STATE THAT THE COST OF COMMERCIAL AIR TRAVEL FROM DALLAS TO SAN FRANCISCO VIA OKLAHOMA CITY WOULD BE $108, AND THE COST FROM DALLAS DIRECT TO SAN FRANCISCO WOULD BE $91. YOU ASK WHETHER THE COST OF THE DIRECT RETURN FLIGHT SHOULD BE DEDUCTED FROM MR. HOUGHTON'S VOUCHER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH C 10102-6, JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS (JTR), VOLUME 2, OR WHETHER AN EXCEPTION MAY BE MADE SINCE MR. HOUGHTON BORE THE COST OF RETURNING HIS AUTO AND FAMILY TO VALLEJO.

PARAGRAPH C 10102-6, JTR, VOLUME 2, PROVIDES, IN PERTINENT PART, AS FOLLOWS:

"TEMPORARY DUTY DIRECTED AT TERMINATION OF LEAVE STATUS. AN EMPLOYEE ON AUTHORIZED LEAVE AWAY FROM HIS PERMANENT DUTY STATION WHO IS DIRECTED, AT THE TERMINATION OF LEAVE, TO PROCEED TO A PLACE OF TEMPORARY DUTY AND UPON COMPLETION OF THE TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT TO RETURN TO HIS PERMANENT DUTY STATION, WILL BE ALLOWED PER DIEM AND TRAVEL EXPENSES ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT TRAVEL RELATING TO THE TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT EXCEEDS THE CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF DIRECT ROUTE TRAVEL FROM THE PLACE OF LEAVE TO THE PERMANENT DUTY STATION (19 COMP. GEN. 977). ***"

IN OUR DECISION 19 COMP. GEN. 977 AN EMPLOYEE ON LEAVE AWAY FROM HIS HEADQUARTERS PERFORMED TEMPORARY DUTY AT THE EXPIRATION OF HIS LEAVE PRIOR TO HIS RETURN TO HEADQUARTERS. THE EMPLOYEE WAS ENTITLED ONLY TO THE ADDITIONAL EXPENSE OF RETURNING TO HEADQUARTERS BY AN INDIRECT ROUTE SINCE AN EMPLOYEE ON LEAVE AWAY FROM HIS HEADQUARTERS IS REQUIRED TO RETURN TO HEADQUARTERS AT HIS OWN EXPENSE AND THE EMPLOYEE WOULD HAVE INCURRED PERSONAL TRAVEL EXPENSES FOR RETURN BY THE DIRECT ROUTE IF HE HAD NOT PERFORMED TEMPORARY DUTY. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IN THE ABSENCE OF A TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENT, MR. HOUGHTON WOULD HAVE RETURNED TO VALLEJO WITH HIS FAMILY BY AUTO AND WOULD NOT HAVE INCURRED THE ADDITIONAL EXPENSE OF THE RETURN AIRPLANE FLIGHT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, MR. HOUGHTON MAY BE ALLOWED THE COST OF HIS RETURN AIRPLANE FLIGHT. SEE B-80685, JANUARY 12, 1949; B-72823, APRIL 7, 1948.

THE VOUCHER, WHICH IS RETURNED HEREWITH, MAY BE PAID WITHOUT A DEDUCTION FOR THE CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF TRANSPORTATION FROM DALLAS TO SAN FRANCISCO, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.