TRAVELING EXPENSES-OFFICIALS OF TREASURY DEPARTMENTUSE OF OWN AUTOMOBILES.

Under the travel regulations of the Treasury Department, authorizing reimbursement for the actual cost of "necessary expenses" incurred in connection with the use of the traveler's own automobile on official travel the expenses which may be reimbursed are exclusive of the services of a chauffeur, which are not considered necessary within the meaning of the regulations.

Decision by Comptroller General McCarl, September 29, 1922:

H. C. Comings, collector of customs, district No. 2, St. Albans, Vt., by letter dated July 21, 1922, requested a review of settlement No. 10628, dated May 25, 1922, wherein were disallowed in his accounts by the Treasury Department Division, this office, items aggregating $14.50 paid for pay, meals, and lodging of a chauffeur as shown in vouchers Nos. 264 and 265.

Voucher No. 264 is for expenses incurred by the collector and two deputies on a trip to ports of entry within the district (North Troy, Newport, Derby Line, Island Pond, Beecher Falls, and Canaan, Vt.) for the purpose of examining conditions there. The trip covered two days, September 13 and 14, 1921, and was made in the collector's own automobile, for which a chauffeur was employed, whose expenses were also included in the voucher. Expenses for the chauffeur were disallowed as follows:

Voucher No. 265 is for expenses incurred by the collector in trip to Burlington, Vt., to confer with district attorney, the trip being made in the collector's own automobile, for which a chauffeur was employed. Expenses for the chauffeur were disallowed as follows: Aug. 31, 1921. Dinner, Burlington, Vt----Aug. 31, 1921. Paid chauffeur, 1 day.......

Total

3

4

Paragraph 10 of the travel regulations of the Treasury Department which became effective January 1, 1919, reads:

Own conveyance.-Charges for use of own conveyance will not be allowed as travel expense in the accounts of any officer or employee. Charges for such necessary incidental expenses incurred in connection with use of own conveyance as are readily ascertainable-as for gasoline, oil, or horse feed used on trip-will be allowed, but only to the extent of the actual cost thereof. A commuted rate charge will not be allowed in any case.

The collector submits that the expenses disallowed were charges for such necessary incidental expenses incurred in connection with his own conveyance as are contemplated by said paragraph 10 of the travel regulations.

In an unpublished decision by the Comptroller of the Treasury January 7, 1916, 76 MS., 98, there was involved the question of credit for the reimbursement for hotel expenses of a chauffeur for, and repairs to, a collector's automobile incident to travel performed by the collector and his special deputy in visiting the various ports of entry in his district under authority of the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, who later advised the collector, with respect to his request for a reasonable allowance for expense of operating his own automobile in performing the travel, that there was no objection to the use of his own automobile in said travel,

the actual expenses incurred in the purchase of gasoline to be paid from the appropriation “Collecting the revenue from customs,"

The disallowance by the auditor of credit for expense of chauffeur for, and repairs to, the automobile was affirmed by the comptroller. The travel regulations at the time said decision of January 7, 1916, was rendered made no provision, it appears, for reimbursing the traveler for the cost of operating his own conveyance when the same was used by him in traveling on official business, and the insertion of said paragraph 10 in the regulations effective January 1, 1919, was intended apparently to provide for expenses in accordance with decisions of this office; that is, in cases where employees elect to use their own automobiles in official travel there are allowable such necessary operating expenses as the actual cost of gasoline and oil used on the trip. Pay and subsistence of a chauffeur may be inci, dental expenses, but they are not necessary incidental expenses contemplated by and allowable under said paragraph 10 of the travel regulations.

Upon a review of the matter the settlement is sustained.

ALLOWANCES OF OFFICERS UNDER SAVING CLAUSE IN JOINT SERVICE PAY ACT WHEN RESERVED PAY EQUIVALENT OF THAT OF HIGHER PAY PERIOD.

Army officers are limited, on and after July 1, 1922, to the allowances for subsistence and rental of quarters prescribed by the act of June 10, 1922, 42 Stat., 628, for the pay periods in which, except for the saving clause, such officers would be classified by reason of their grade and length of service, and the fact that such officers may be entitled under the saving clause in section 16 of said act to continue in receipt of a rate of pay equal in amount to the pay of a higher pay period than that prescribed by said act for officers of like grade and service does not entitle them to the allowances attached to the pay of the higher period,

Comptroller General McCarl to the Secretary of War, September 29, 1922:

I have your reference of September 2, 1922, with accompanying papers, wherein decision is requested of the question presented by Maj Alfred L. Rockwood, Chemical Warfare Service, whether an officer receiving the base pay prescribed for the fourth pay period

under the provisions of section 16 of the act of June 10, 1922, 42 Stat., 632, is also entitled to receive the subsistence and rental allowances of an officer in that period as prescribed in sections 5 and 6 of the same act.

The question arises in connection with the payment of pay and allowances to Major Rockwood for the month of July, 1922, by the Finance Officer, United States Army, Washington, D. C.

It appears that Major Rockwood was originally commissioned a second lieutenant, and having served over nine years as a commissloned officer, received pay as a major, United States Army, at the rate of $3,300 per annum; commutation of subsistence as an officer with dependents receiving base pay of the second, third, or sixth period; and rental allowance as an officer with dependents receiving the base pay of the third period. He urges that as he received the pay prescribed for the fourth period he was also entitled to receive the subsistence and rental allowances for that period.

The joint service pay act of June 10, 1922, 42 Stat., 625, provides in section 1:

That, beginning July 1, 1922, for the purpose of computing the annual pay of the commissioned officers of the Regular Army and Marine Corps below the grade of brigadier general pay periods are prescribed, and the base

pay of each is fixed as follows:

The first period, $1.500; the second period, $2,000; the third period, $2,400; the fourth period, $8,000; the fifth period, $8,500; and the sixth period, $4,000.

The pay of the fifth period shall be paid to

who have completed twenty-three years' service

The pay of the fourth period shall be paid to

majors of the Army

*

majors of the Army

who have completed fourteen years' service, or whose first appoint ment in the permanent service was in a grade above that corresponding to Becond lieutenant in the Army

The pay of the third period shall be paid to majors of the Army who are not entitled to the pay of the fourth, fifth, or sixth period.

Major Rockwood, having been originally appointed a second lieutenant and having completed only nine years' service, would come thder the above-quoted provisions of the act, in the third period, with base pay of $2,400. Section 16 of the same act, however, provided:

That nothing contained in this Act shall operate to reduce the pay of any officer on the active list below the pay to which he is entitled by reason of his grade and length of service on June 80, 1922, not including additional pay authorized by the Act * approved May 18, 1920.

The pay of a major on the active list June 30, 1922, as provided by the act of May 11, 1908, 35 Stat., 108, with the 10 per cent increase on the same for more than five years' commissioned service, was $3,300 per annum. Major Rockwood was accordingly entitled to continue to receive pay at the rate of $3,300 per annum. The officer receives pay in amount equal to that of pay prescribed for the fourth period, but he receives such amount by the saving clause

provision of the enactment and not by virtue of being an officer within the fourth period.

The saving clause only provided for continuing the pay that an officer was entitled to receive by reason of his grade and length of service on June 30, 1922, and the allowances authorized by sections 5 and 6 of the act of June 10, 1922, must be based on the pay that an officer would be entitled to receive under the provisions of that act were it not for such saving clause.

As hereinbefore stated, Major Rockwood was, by virtue of his original permanent appointment as second lieutenant and length of service, entitled to pay of the third period and you are advised that he was correctly paid the subsistence and rental allowances as of that period.

TRAVEL REGULATIONS-WAIVER BY HEAD OF DEPARTMENT. A general provision in travel regulations for the waiver thereof by the head of the department or establishment would render such regulations practically nugatory and ineffective and should not be included therein; but provision for approval by the head of the department or establishment of emergency expenditures not covered by the travel regulations may properly be included therein.

Cpmptroller General McCarl to the Secretary of Labor, September 29, 1922: I have your letter of September 13, 1922, inquiring as to how far you are authorized to waive travel regulations prescribed by you, it having been provided, paragraph 161, that

These regulations or any portion thereof may be waived by the Secretary in the case of any account coming under its provision, or in case of emergencies when expenditures are incurred not covered by any of its authorizations, but such waiver will only be made upon a full statement of facts showing the case to be exceptional and meritorious, which statement must be permanently attached to the account.

The purpose and scope of travel regulations are to advise the traveling employee of the character of travel expenses which are permissible, and they become enforceable accordingly. Regulations would practically become nugatory and their enforcement ineffective if there be general power of waiver after action contrary to their requirements. The first provision of paragraph 161, for waiver "in the case of any account coming under its provision" practically destroys regulation and is not proper. The further provision relating to emergency expenditures does not contemplate so much a waiver of regulations as specific approval of expenditures for which the regulations have made no provision, and as a showing of facts is required from which the emergency and necessity for the expenditure can be determined, the provision is proper.

NAVAL FLIGHT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR DETAILS TO DUTY INHERENTLY INVOLVING FLYING AND REGULAR AND FREQUENT PARTICIPATION IN AERIAL FLIGHTS.

For conformity with 2 Comp. Gen., 185, instructions have been issued by the Navy Department setting forth flight classifications for details to duty inherently involving flying and regular and frequent participation in aerial flights for the purposes of the payment of the 50 per cent increase of pay authorized for duty performed thereunder. For classifications see decision.

Comptroller General McCarl to the Secretary of the Navy, September 29, 1922:

I have your letter of September 15, 1922, resubmitting for approval section F of the instructions for carrying into effect the joint service pay bill of June 10, 1922, 42 Stat., 625, revised to meet the requirements specified in decision of September 6, 1922, 2 Comp. Gen., 185. Section F deals with the payment of increase of pay for aviation duty.

In the decision of September 6, 1922, it was stated that the duty the performance of which under proper detail carries the additional pay is duty that in itself can and does require frequent and regular aerial flights, and the pay is not payable because of flights performed independently thereof; that Congress clearly did not confer the 50 per cent increase of pay for flights that could be or are performed independently of a necessity therefor inherent in the duty itself to which detailed, as perfunctory flights made while in the performance of office or ground duty, neither requiring nor contemplating participation in regular and frequent aerial flights, or while unassigned to any specific duty and with the object only of acquiring or maintaining a flight status which will carry the additional pay.

The decision further held that the flight certificate should not only set forth that flights to the number required by the Executive order or period of time in air, and within prescribed dates, have in fact been made, but in addition states that they were flights necessitated by and inherent in the duty itself to which detailed, and that no facts affecting such inherent duty have occurred in the said flight period except as therein set forth, and should have appended a schedule of flights, showing dates, numbers, and periods in air.

To meet the requirements of this decision and to set forth what flying is inherent in duty requiring regular and frequent flights, the following classifications have now been submitted:

4. Duty in the fleet aircraft squadrons or in ships equipped with aircraft which inherently involves participation in frequent and regular flights for one or more of the following purposes:

(a) Fleet air tactical operations or other flights for assisting operations of the fleet; exercises in training for fleet air tactical operations.

(b) Flights required for compliance with and in training for the aircraft gunnery, bombing, and torpedo exercises prescribed by the Chief of Naval Operations.