HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobadgyn0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
DECISION
C ~
/1
~
'>/~~
~ \IT~
THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL,
OF THE UNITED STATES
WASHINGTON. 0. C. 20548
FILE: B-192344 DATE:February 28, 1979
MATTE OF: J Two Government Employees
Traveling in Privately Owned Vehicle]
Where an employee utilizes a privately owned
vehicle as a matter of personal preference
when such use is not determined to be advan-
tageous to the Government, the employee's
total reimbursement for the travel is limited
to the total constructive cost of appropriate
common carrier transportation. In the compu-
tation of the constructive costs, the employee
is not entitled to include the cost by common
carrier of transporting other Government
employees who accompany the employee on
the trip to determine maximum reimburse-
ment when there is no order or administra-
tive approval of additional payment.
Mr. James W. Shores, byiLLer dated May 31, 1978, requests
reconsideration of a settlement by the Claims Division of this Office,
Z-2707005, May 23, 1978, which disallowed the employee's claim
for additional reimbursement in the amount of $38. 87 for expenses
incurred as a result of travel performed between Washington, D. C.
and Cleveland, Ohio, as an employee of the Patent and Trademark
Office.
The record reveals that Mr. Shores was authorized to travel by
privately owned vehicle (POV) from Washington, D. C. to Cleveland,
Ohio to attend a meeting byJ: el Authorization 76-68, September 18,
1975. The travel authorization p:roTvided that the reimbursement of
mileage could not exceed th : .trip air fare to Cleveland ($80. 73)
plus taxis and/or limousinesi .Oi L trip to Cleveland, another
Government employee, Mr. John MacIvor, travelled as a passenger
in Mr. Shores' POV.
In the travel voucher summitted for his trip to Cleveland,
Mr. Shores included in the.ontr ive cost statement the taxis and
common carrier air fare : ,Mr. Maclvor would have incurred
had he flown commerciallyc 0Cle eland. The Office of Finance in the
Patent and Trademark Office suspended $38. 87 from Mr. Shores,
reimbursement with the explanation that costs for common carrier
transportation saved by the use of a POV when more than one employee
141-I
DIGEST:
?e7? 4
0--a 31
tu,](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobadgyn0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)