Board of Contract Appeals

                 General Services Administration

                      Washington, D.C. 20405







                                                 



                           May 18, 2004

                                                 





                         GSBCA 16365-TRAV





                In the Matter of FRANK A. CONDINO





     Frank A. Condino, Athol, MA, Claimant.



     Rick Miller, Civilian Travel and Overseas Allowances, Compensation and Legislation

Division, Office of the Chief of Staff, Department of the Air Force, Washington, DC,

appearing for Department of the Air Force.



DANIELS, Board Judge (Chairman).



     When an employee assigned to a temporary duty site travels on non-workdays to a

location other than his permanent duty station, the Government must reimburse him for

lodging costs he incurred at that location, up to the maximum amount allowed at the

temporary duty site.



                            Background



     This issue was raised by Frank A. Condino, an employee of the Department of the Air

Force.  The Air Force  assigned Mr. Condino to temporary duty in Huntsville, Alabama, for

the period from January 19 to 30, 2004.  While in Huntsville, Mr. Condino stayed with

relatives and properly did not ask the Air Force to reimburse him for lodging expenses.  After

work on Friday, January 23, Mr. Condino drove at his own expense approximately 250 miles

to Tunica, Mississippi, where he spent two nights in commercial lodging.  He then returned

to Huntsville on the evening of Sunday, January 25, and completed his temporary duty

assignment.



     The employee and the agency disagree as to the responsibility for the cost of lodging

in Tunica.  Mr. Condino maintains that the agency should pay for the cost, limited by the

maximum amount allowable for lodging at Huntsville, his temporary duty site.  He points to

section C4555-A.1 of the Defense Department's Joint Travel Regulations (JTR), which states, 

"If an employee obtains lodging outside the area covered by the TDY [temporary duty]

location per diem rate because of personal preference or convenience, the allowable per diem

shall be limited to the maximum per diem rate prescribed for the TDY location."  JTR

C4555-A.1 (Jan. 2004).  



     The Air Force contends that the employee should incur the cost of lodging at Tunica.

It relies on JTR C4563-E, which states, "Employees on TDY who travel for personal reasons

on nonworkdays from a TDY site to locations other than their homes or PDSs [permanent

duty stations] are entitled to per diem or AEA [an actual expense allowance] for the

nonworkdays up to the amount payable had they remained at the TDY site."  The Air Force

believes that this provision is more relevant than the one cited by Mr. Condino, for the latter

provision is entitled "Lodging at a TDY Location" and therefore does not speak to a situation

like Mr. Condino's in which the lodging is at a location distant from the temporary duty site.



                            Discussion



     The Air Force is correct in asserting that section C4563-E is more relevant to the

situation at issue.  We do not see that provision as mandating the result that the agency

suggests, however.  The "amount payable had [the employee] remained at the TDY site" is

not the amount payable for any nights of the temporary duty assignment other than the ones

for which the employee seeks payment.  The JTR does not require an employee who stays

with friends or relatives for some nights of a temporary duty assignment to stay with those

individuals for all nights of the assignment.  Each night is separate, and reimbursement for

lodging costs on the night must be assessed separately.  See JTR C4553-C (generally,

reimbursement for lodging per day "may not exceed actual lodging costs up to the applicable

maximum amount"); 41 CFR 301-11.21(a) (2003) (no distinction between reimbursement

for lodging expenses incurred on workdays and non-workdays as long as employee is on

travel status).  The reimbursement for lodging costs Mr. Condino incurred on each of his

nights in Tunica is therefore the amount for which the Air Force would have been

responsible had he incurred those costs in Huntsville.



     In support of its position that this conclusion is not appropriate, the Air Force

analogizes Mr. Condino's situation to that of an employee who voluntarily returns home on

non-workdays while on an extended temporary duty assignment.  The JTR require that for

such an employee, the agency must limit reimbursement to the cost which would have been

incurred had the employee remained at the temporary duty site.  One of the expenses used

in examples shown for constructing that would-have-been-incurred cost is the actual lodging

expenses incurred by the employee at the site.  JTR C4677.  Although this suggestion is

creative, it is not compelling.  Several other examples given by the JTR for computing

reimbursement of costs actually incurred by employees on temporary duty assignments show

that reimbursement for lodging costs is on a day-by-day basis   if an employee stays in a

commercial facility on some nights, in Government quarters on others, and with friends or

relatives on still others, reimbursement is calculated differently for each night.  JTR C4565.



                             Decision



     The claim is granted.











                                   _________________________ 

                                   STEPHEN M. DANIELS

                                   Board Judge