About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-208791 1 (1983-01-24)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadkvq0001 and id is 1 raw text is: DECISION FILE: B-208791 MATTER OF: DIGEST: AI 9- THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON. 0. C. 20548 DATE: January 24, 1983 James R. Curry Employee, whose official station was Martinsburg, West Virginia, and who was performing temporary duty in Cincinnati, Ohio, traveled to Parkersburg, West Virginia, on the weekends for personal reasons. Employee may not be reimbursed transportation expenses on a comparative cost basis under FTR para. 1-8.4f unless he returns to his duty station or place of abode. During weekend travel to a location other than his residence or permanent duty station, his entitlement to actual subsistence expenses continues, and the fact that he actually incurs relatively few subsistence expenses does not entitle the employee to reimbursement of transportation costs incurred for personal reasons. The issue presented is whether an employee on temporary duty spanning a weekend may be reimbursed on a comparative cost basis for weekend travel exmenses from his temporary duty station to a location other than his headquarters or place of abode. Comptroller General decisions Matter of Sullivan, B-205696, June 15, 1982, and Matter of Moore, B-198827, August 3, 1981, preclude payment even though the travel expenses incurred do not exceed actual subsistence expenses the employee would have incurred had he remained at the temporary duty station. An authorized certifying officer at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) requests an advance decision on the propriety of paying the claim of Mr. James R. Curry, an IRS employee whose duty station and place of abode is Martinsburg, West Virginia. Mr. Curry performed temporary duty in Cincinnati, Ohio, between June 14 and July 2, 1982. On the weekends Mr. Curry drove to his parent's residence in Parkersburg, West Virginia. He has claimed $170.20 in travel expenses for the two weekends. Based on the average cost of the whole days spent in Cincinnati, he would have spent $95.60 each weekend he remained in Cincinnati. The IRS disallowed his claim for transportation expenses in accordance with Internal Revenue Manual 1763, Travel Handbook, section 342.2(2), which prohibits payment of transportation for personal trips. He was allowed the cost of a meal enroute to Parkersburg, but since he stayed with relatives, he claimed no other subsistence expenses during the weekends. Mr. Curry has reclaimed the amount of $170.20 which was disallowed. The certifying officer questions whether the transportation cost of the round-trip travel between Cincinnati and Parkersburg may be reimbursed in an amount not to exceed the cost Mr. Curry would have incurred if he remained in Cincinnati. I)

What Is HeinOnline?

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.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most