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/gaocrptaech0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
Comptroller General
of the United States
Washington, D.C. 20548
Decision
Matter of: Improper Travel Advance Paid by Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission Imprest Fund Cashier
File: B-271021
Date: September 18, 1996
DIGEST
An imprest fund cashier at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
may not be reimbursed for a travel advance paid from his imprest fund to a witness
traveling on government business, because the travel advance was made contrary to
EEOC procedures governing payment of travel expenses. The fact that the cashier
received instructions from superiors to make the improper payment does not relieve
him of responsibility for the resulting deficiency in his account. Statement of a
superior that he would assume liability for repayment of the funds is personal to
the cashier and does not affect the cashier's liability for the improper payment.
DECISION
This is in response to a request from Mrs. Willie King, Director, Financial
Management Division, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), for a
decision as to whether an imprest fund cashier at the EEOC may be reimbursed for
a travel advance paid from his imprest fund to an EEOC witness traveling on
government business. As set forth below, we conclude that the voucher submitted
by the imprest fund cashier for reimbursement may not be paid, because the travel
advance was made contrary to EEOC procedures governing payment of travel
expenses of witnesses.
Background
This case involves a travel advance paid to a witness for the EEOC who was not a
government employee. The EEOC requested that Ms. Karen Rudolph appear as a
witness in a pending matter in Cheyenne, Wyoming. Ms. Rudolph was to travel
from Gillette, Wyoming to Cheyenne on June 8, 1994.
On June 8, 1994, Mr. Michael Fetzer, Supervisory Program Analyst, EEOC Field
Management Programs-West, sent a memorandum to Carlos Villescas, Acting
Director of the Denver District, EEOC, requesting that Mr. Villescas immediately
make available from [the] District's imprest fund an amount not to exceed $150.00,
131830](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaocrptaech0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)