Board of Contract Appeals

                    General Services Administration

                         Washington, D.C. 20405

 

 

 

                   __________________________________

 

                             April 12, 2000

                   __________________________________

 

 

                            GSBCA 15143-TRAV

 

 

                 In the Matter of  PATRICIA E. ANDERSON

 

 

        Patricia E. Anderson, Washington, DC, Claimant.

 

        Maxine   Anderson-Brown,   Chief,  Conference   and   Travel

   Management Services Branch, Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC,

   appearing for Department of Commerce.

 

   WILLIAMS, Board Judge.

 

        Claimant, who  resides with her  eighty-five-year-old, blind

   mother, seeks the cost of transporting her mother to her sister's

   residence so that her sister could care for her during claimant's

   temporary  duty (TDY) assignment.   Because claimant's  travel to

   her  sister's  was not  authorized  by  the  agency and  was  not

   official  business travel,  she may  not be  reimbursed  for that

   portion  of her  trip.    We reach  this  conclusion even  though

   claimant's  round trip flight  to her  TDY destination  cost less

   departing from her sister's location than from claimant's.

 

                               Background

 

        Claimant,  an  employee   of  the  Bureau  of   the  Census,

   United States Department of Commerce,  resides in the Washington,

   D.C.,  area with  her eight-five-year-old, legally  blind mother.

   Claimant  essentially acts as  her mother's caretaker  during her

   nonworking hours  and  has to  transport  her mother  to  another

   family member's home any time she travels for business.

 

        On  March 29, 1999,  claimant was  authorized  to travel  to

   Accra,  Ghana, between  April 30 and  May 17,  1999, on  official

   Census Bureau business.  Claimant was authorized the airfare from

   Washington, D.C., to Ghana  at the  Government contract  airfare.

   The  Department of  Commerce  purchased  an  airline  ticket  for

   claimant  to travel  to Ghana  and back  for $3238.20.   Claimant

   exchanged this ticket for a ticket from Detroit to Ghana and back

   which  cost  $2252.10, so  she  could  drive  her mother  to  her

   sister's  home in  Michigan and  travel  to and  from Ghana  from

   Detroit.  Claimant's  travel authorization did not  authorize her

   to  travel  to  Michigan, but  contemplated  that  claimant would

   travel  from  Washington,  D.C.  to  Ghana  and  back.   Claimant

   refunded   the  difference  of   $986.10  in  the   cost  of  the

   Detroit/Ghana airline ticket to the Department of Commerce.

 

 

        Claimant was reimbursed $100 for  taxi costs to and from the

   airport from her residence.  Claimant seeks an additional $347.90

   to  cover  her  expenses for  traveling  in  her  privately owned

   vehicle (POV) to drop her mother off in Michigan before departing

   for Ghana.  

 

                               Discussion

 

        While  claimant's  transportation  of  her  elderly,  infirm

   mother  to  a  family member's  residence  is  understandable and

   laudable, this  trip does  not constitute  a reimbursable  travel

   expense  under the  statutes  and regulations  governing  federal

   employee travel.   Several  provisions apply.   Statute  dictates

   that only actual and necessary travel expenses may be allowed for

   Government  employees.   5 U.S.C.   5706  (1994).   Further,  the

   statute  that  authorizes  reimbursement  for  mileage  expenses,

   5 U.S.C.    5704, provides that  reimbursement is  available when

   employees  are   "on  official  business  for   the  Government."

   Claimant's trip  to  transport her  mother to  her sister's  home

   prior to her  official business was  personal, not authorized  by

   the  Government, and  not necessary  for the conduct  of official

   business.  

 

        The  Federal   Travel  Regulation   (FTR)  reiterates   that

   employees  are eligible  for payment  of transportation  expenses

   "when performing  official travel."   At  the time that  claimant

   transported her  mother to Michigan,  she was not in  an official

   travel  status.    Cf.  Sydney  Smith,  B-193923  (Jan. 3,  1980)

   (frequent  stopovers  necessitated by  the illness  of claimant's

   wife were a matter of convenience and not of official necessity).

   Finally, the FTR  provides that reimbursement for  travel will be

   limited  to  the  cost of  travel  by  a direct  route  or  on an

   uninterrupted  basis, and  that  travel will  be via  the usually

   traveled  route  unless  the  agency  authorizes  or  approves  a

   different route as  officially necessary.   41 CFR 301-10.7, 10.8

   (1999).

 

        The Board and the General Accounting Office have interpreted

   these  regulations  to  mean that  when  an  employee  chooses an

   indirect routing for  an official trip, reimbursement  is limited

   to the lesser  of the constructive cost of direct  routing or the

   actual    cost   of    the   travel.       Michael A.   Dilligan,

   GSBCA 13644-TRAV, 97-2 BCA   29,045; Elinor C. Saunders, B-253551

   (Nov. 5, 1993); Marty J. Dama, B-235070 (Oct. 6, 1989); see Susan

   Reed,  GSBCA 13993-TRAV,  97-2  BCA     29,303  at  n.4  (mileage

   incident   to  personal  portion  of  trip  disallowed).    Here,

   claimant's reimbursement is  properly limited to the  actual cost

   of her travel, since the Ghana/Michigan airfare was less than the

   Ghana/Washington, D.C. airfare would have been.

 

 

                                Decision

 

        The claim is denied.

   ________________________________

 

                                      MARY ELLEN COSTER WILLIAMS

                                      Board Judge