B-176512, OCT 25, 1972

B-176512, OCT 25, 1972

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL - TRAVEL EXPENSES - AUTO-TRAIN DECISION ALLOWING CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT OF A VOUCHER PRESENTED BY DR. SAM R. HOOVER FOR TRAVEL EXPENSES INCIDENT TO TRAVEL HE PERFORMED FOR TEMPORARY DUTY AT NAPLES, FLA., FROM APRIL 12 TO 14, 1972. THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT, FOR COMPARATIVE COST PURPOSES, THAT COSTS BE PRORATIONED FOR TRAVEL BY AUTO-TRAIN SO AS TO DETERMINE THE EXACT AMOUNT OF THE PASSENGER FARE INCREMENT. THEREFORE, REIMBURSEMENT IS ONLY LIMITED TO THE COST OF ROUND-TRIP AIR COACH FARE FOR THAT SAME TRAVEL.

TO MR. ARTHUR L. ROHAN:

THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 10, 1972, REQUESTING A DECISION FROM THIS OFFICE AS TO THE LEGALITY OF CERTIFICATION OF A VOUCHER PRESENTED FOR PAYMENT BY DR. SAM R. HOOVER. DR. HOOVER IS CLAIMING TRAVEL EXPENSES INCIDENT TO TRAVEL HE PERFORMED FOR TEMPORARY DUTY AT NAPLES, FLORIDA, FROM APRIL 12 TO APRIL 14, 1972.

AS YOUR LETTER EXPLAINS AND DR. HOOVER'S VOUCHER INDICATES, ACTUAL TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED BY THE EMPLOYEE VIA AUTO-TRAIN BETWEEN LORTON, VIRGINIA, AND SANFORD, FLORIDA, TO NAPLES, FLORIDA, AND RETURN TO SANFORD BY PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE, RETURNING TO LORTON, VIRGINIA, IN THE SAME MANNER, THE TRAVEL OCCURRING BETWEEN APRIL 7, 1972, AND APRIL 17, 1972. DR. HOOVER CLAIMS REIMBURSEMENT ON A CONSTRUCTIVE BASIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 4.3 OF THE STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, CLAIMING $180, THE COST OF TRAVEL BY AIR FROM WASHINGTON NATIONAL AIRPORT TO NAPLES, FLORIDA, AND RETURN, AND PER DIEM FOR THE 3-3/4 DAYS WHICH WOULD HAVE ELAPSED HAD TRAVEL BEEN ACCOMPLISHED BY AIR.

THE CHARGE FOR AUTO-TRAIN SERVICE FOR DR. HOOVER AND HIS WIFE, WHO ACCOMPANIED HIM, WAS $380 FOR THE ROUND TRIP BETWEEN LORTON, VIRGINIA, AND SANFORD, FLORIDA. UNDER THIS MODE OF TRAVEL, DR. HOOVER WAS ABLE TO TAKE HIS PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE WHICH HE USED FOR THE ROUND-TRIP TRAVEL BETWEEN SANFORD, FLORIDA, AND NAPLES, FLORIDA. THE $380 FARE COVERS TRANSPORTATION OF THE AUTOMOBILE AND UP TO 4 PERSONS. THERE IS NO BREAKDOWN IN RATES TO SHOW THE CHARGE FOR TRANSPORTATION OF THE AUTOMOBILE SEPARATELY FROM THE CHARGE FOR PASSENGER TRANSPORTATION.

YOUR CONCERN IN THE MATTER IS THE PROPER METHOD OF REIMBURSING DR. HOOVER IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT YOU ARE UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF THE FARE PAID TO AUTO-TRAIN WHICH SHOULD BE ATTRIBUTABLE SOLELY TO HIS OFFICIAL TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES. IN CONNECTION THEREWITH YOU STATE THAT ALTHOUGH THE EXACT AMOUNT OF THE PASSENGER FARE INCREMENT IS NOT AVAILABLE, IT APPEARS OBVIOUS THAT THE PART ATTRIBUTABLE TO DR. HOOVER'S TRANSPORTATION WAS CONSIDERABLY LESS THAN THE $180 CLAIMED.

THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT, FOR COMPARATIVE COST PURPOSES, THAT THERE BE A PRORATIONING OF COSTS IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES HERE INVOLVED. HAD DR. HOOVER TRAVELED ALONE AND USED THE AUTO-TRAIN, THE COSTS WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SAME. FOR REIMBURSEMENT PURPOSES HE IS LIMITED TO THE ROUND TRIP AIR COACH FARE DIRECT FROM WASHINGTON NATIONAL AIRPORT TO MIAMI, FLORIDA, THENCE BY AIR TAXI TO NAPLES, FLORIDA, AND RETURN BY THE SAME MODE OF TRANSPORTATION. HIS CLAIM IS ON THAT BASIS AND THEREFORE PROPER.

THE VOUCHER IS RETURNED HEREWITH AND MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.