B-158931, MAY 26, 1966
Highlights
TO THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY: THIS IS IN REPLY TO THE LETTER OF MR. WAS DIRECTED BY HIS SUPERVISOR TO TRANSPORT IN HIS AUTOMOBILE FIVE OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE'S MANHATTAN DISTRICT OFFICE. HE POINTS OUT THAT THIS METHOD OF GETTING EMPLOYEES TO THE OFFICE WAS AN ADVANTAGE TO THE GOVERNMENT SINCE THE WORK OF ENFORCEMENT WAS ABLE TO BE CARRIED ON AND THERE WAS LESS LOST PAID TIME. SUCH USE IS AUTHORIZED OR APPROVED AS ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT. PAYMENT SHALL BE MADE ON A MILEAGE BASIS AT RATES NOT TO EXCEED: * * *" THE RULE IS WELL ESTABLISHED THAT AN EMPLOYEE MUST BEAR THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION BETWEEN HIS PLACE OF RESIDENCE AND HIS PLACE OF DUTY AT HIS OFFICIAL STATION. 11 COMP.
B-158931, MAY 26, 1966
TO THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY:
THIS IS IN REPLY TO THE LETTER OF MR. J. E. FORESTALL, ACTING ASSISTANT REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, NORTH ATLANTIC REGION, DATED APRIL 11, 1966, IN WHICH HE REQUESTS INFORMATION AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF CERTIFYING FOR PAYMENT A TRAVEL VOUCHER OF MR. HAROLD PINKOFF, AN EMPLOYEE OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, IN THE AMOUNT OF $22.50.
THE COMMISSIONER STATES IN HIS LETTER THAT MR. PINKOFF, DURING THE RECENT SUBWAY STRIKE IN NEW YORK CITY, WAS DIRECTED BY HIS SUPERVISOR TO TRANSPORT IN HIS AUTOMOBILE FIVE OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE'S MANHATTAN DISTRICT OFFICE, ROUND TRIP FROM THEIR HOMES IN BROOKLYN DURING THE PERIOD BETWEEN JANUARY 6, 1966, AND JANUARY 13, 1966.
HE POINTS OUT THAT THIS METHOD OF GETTING EMPLOYEES TO THE OFFICE WAS AN ADVANTAGE TO THE GOVERNMENT SINCE THE WORK OF ENFORCEMENT WAS ABLE TO BE CARRIED ON AND THERE WAS LESS LOST PAID TIME. HE ALSO URGES THAT SINCE AN EMPLOYEE MAY BE REIMBURSED FOR PERFORMING OFFICIAL BUSINESS ON HIS WAY TO WORK THEN IT SHOULD FOLLOW THAT HE SHOULD BE REIMBURSED FOR TRANSPORTING FELLOW EMPLOYEES TO THE OFFICE AT THE DIRECTION OF HIS SUPERVISOR.
WITH RESPECT TO THE PAYMENT OF MILEAGE, SECTION 3.5B (1) STANDARDIZED GOVERNMENT TRAVEL REGULATIONS PROVIDES, IN PERTINENT PART, AS FOLLOWS:
"WHEN EMPLOYEES AND OTHERS RENDERING SERVICE TO THE GOVERNMENT USE PRIVATELY OWNED MOTOR VEHICLES IN THE CONDUCT OF OFFICIAL BUSINESS WITHIN OR OUTSIDE THEIR DESIGNATED POSTS OF DUTY OR PLACES OF SERVICE, AND SUCH USE IS AUTHORIZED OR APPROVED AS ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT, PAYMENT SHALL BE MADE ON A MILEAGE BASIS AT RATES NOT TO EXCEED: * * *"
THE RULE IS WELL ESTABLISHED THAT AN EMPLOYEE MUST BEAR THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION BETWEEN HIS PLACE OF RESIDENCE AND HIS PLACE OF DUTY AT HIS OFFICIAL STATION. 11 COMP. GEN. 417; 15 ID. 342; 19 ID. 836. THE FACT THAT SUCH EXPENSES MAY BE INCREASED BY EMERGENCY CONDITIONS OR THE PERFORMANCE OF OVERTIME WORK OR THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AUTHORIZED THE METHOD OF TRANSPORTATION USED IN NOWISE TRANSFERS THE OBLIGATION TO THE GOVERNMENT. 16 COMP. GEN. 64; 27 ID. 1; B-117159, OCTOBER 20, 1953. WE RECOGNIZED, HOWEVER, IN OUR DECISION IN 36 COMP. GEN. 795, CONCERNING THE USE OF PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILES BY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION INVESTIGATORS, THAT THERE COULD BE SITUATIONS IN WHICH THAT RULE OF DECISION WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE. THE ACTING REGIONAL COMMISSIONER INDICATES IN HIS LETTER THAT IF THE GROUP RIDING ARRANGEMENT HAD NOT BEEN ADMINISTRATIVELY DIRECTED AND USED THE EMPLOYEES WOULD HAVE BEEN AUTHORIZED TO REMAIN HOME WITHOUT A CHARGE TO LEAVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION BULLETIN NO. 610 5, DATED JANUARY 7, 1966. CONSISTENT WITH THAT VIEW IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED ADMINISTRATIVELY THAT THE USE OF THE AUTOMOBILE WAS MORE ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT. ALSO, WE UNDERSTAND THAT MR. PINKOFF DOES NOT ORDINARILY USE HIS AUTOMOBILE IN REPORTING FOR WORK AND HAS RECEIVED NO REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE EMPLOYEES WHO ACCOMPANIED HIM.
IN THE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES, AS OUTLINED ABOVE, WE WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO OBJECT TO THE VOUCHER BEING CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT, IF OTHERWISE PROPER.