GovernmentExecutive.com

ice President Al Gore had a happy announcement to make at the Sept. 23 signing ceremony of the 1997 Defense Authorization bill. The bill contains "the biggest change in government travel rules in 40 years," he said. Folded into the legislation are provisions that remove impediments to agencies adopting many of the practices that private sector companies use to manage travel efficiently.

Reforming travel management is an activity that federal officials estimate will save the government more than $800 million a year.

Still, federal travelers are wondering, what's the fallout for us? Receiving travel expense refunds in a more timely fashion is one thing (and no small thing, federal employees say); but what are the prospects that travel reforms will address the indignities of traveling for the government?

You know what we're talking about. Moving into a hotel on the sketchy side of town because other hotels have filled the rooms they set aside for government travelers paying per diem. Turning over to the government any item received through travel that could be construed as a "promotional material"-be it S&H Green Stamps or golf balls from a rental car company-and then watching those promotional items pile up in the office closet, unused. Receiving notice that your travel claim has been rejected, even though you did your best to follow the rules. Being required to beg for upgrades while your corporate counterparts eat, sleep and travel at a level commensurate with their experience and responsibilities.

Government Executive is pleased to report that agencies appear to be grappling with the indignities, also. But first, a reality check is in order.

The fact that government travel is funded by the American public will always require that prudence be the rule in the spending of travel funds. Government ethics standards do allow upgrades to more expensive hotels and airline seats if they are reviewed and can be justified by agency officials. For example, premium-class air travel can be approved under circumstances such as long-haul international flights, flights that are more than 14 hours long or flights that take the passenger across several time zones. However, employees that feel it is undignified to have their travel requests scrutinized have two choices if they'd rather not travel economy class: They can seek work in the private sector. Or they can pick up the extra expense themselves.

While Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary has been criticized for indulging her taste for first-class hotels and airline tickets when traveling for the government, she is actually a model federal traveler. She pays the extra travel expenses herself. In 1995, O'Leary paid $33,000 of her own money for airline ticket upgrades and meals in excess of per diem, according to The Washington Post. When press reports alleged that she was spending more than her share of the department's travel budget, O'Leary requested an audit of her travel expenses. The auditors discovered that the Energy Department had mistakenly approved $8,700 in airline upgrades for the secretary. "I repaid it gladly," O'Leary told The Washington Post.

Deserving Good Service

The General Services Administration has devoted much attention to ensuring that government employees who travel on contract carriers and stay at discount lodging are not subject to substandard service and few choices.

Before 1994, for example, federal per diem rates for cities where hotel rates fluctuate with the season, such as Phoenix and Colorado Springs, were static, limiting federal travelers' lodging options to staying at low-end properties or paying out of their own pockets. GSA instituted a two-tier system so that, now, per diem rates increase during peak periods and decrease in the off-season. For fiscal 1997, GSA awarded contracts for the most city-pair routes in the history of the program-more than 6,100.

In 1995, GSA's Federal Supply Service took the search for quality federal lodging a step further by piloting a preferred hotel initiative called the Best Available Lodging Value (BALV) program. The program recognizes that federal travelers are often at the mercy of hotels when it comes to the availability of rooms at the per diem rate. BALV points feds to properties which do not cap the number of per diem rooms and also offer extra amenities for government travelers. In January, BALV will expand to feature properties at the top 75 federal travel destinations.

Contrary to rumors, not all hotels look down on the federal traveler. The Radisson Plaza Hotel in Alexandria, Va., for example, created a program called PerDiem Plus! in 1994 after surveying their government guests to find out which amenities were most important to them. Under PerDiem Plus!, the Radisson Plaza places federal travelers rooms in an auxiliary building for business travelers and offers amenities such as free shuttle service to National Airport and the Pentagon. "We needed a new market," says Amy Copeland, the hotel's director of marketing and sales.

A Maze of Rules

Another indignity that is not going unnoticed is the fact that the complexity of federal travel rules often leads federal travelers-and, more alarmingly, their supervisors and agency financial personnel-to misunderstand what travel expenses the government will cover. Federal employees must remember that the government is not liable for erroneous information given by its officers, agents or employees. The comptroller general has the authority to waive a government claim to recover an erroneous payment of travel, transportation or relocation expenses if there is no indication of fault, fraud, misrepresentation or lack of good faith on the part of the employee, but employees often have to return money to the government after receiving erroneous information. Two examples of instances in which the comptroller general ruled in favor of the government in 1996 are:

• Decision B-271204. A private sector employee who took a job with the Defense Contract Management Command received erroneously issued travel orders which authorized full permanent change-of-station allowances. When he submitted his travel voucher, he was told he was only eligible to be reimbursed for limited benefits available for a first duty assignment. The comptroller general denied the employee's request that his claim be submitted for relief under the Meritorious Claims Act.

  The comptroller general explained, "There must be a direct causal relationship between the agency error and the incurrence of expenses that the employee would not otherwise have incurred. There is nothing of record to suggest that the expectation of reimbursement for the expenses in question, i.e., travel per diem for his family and lodging and meal expenses for himself and his family . . . pending occupancy of permanent quarters, influenced his decision to accept employment in the first instance."

• Decision B-271190. A sergeant in the National Guard was erroneously given travel advances for three months, incident to a permanent change of station move. He was incorrectly informed by finance personnel that he was entitled to per diem, and spent all $9,000 that he was given. The comptroller general let the employee keep $1,965.99, the amount of the travel advances that he had spent on rent, natural gas, electricity, plane fare, telephone service and the shipment of his belongings. However, GAO instructed the employee to return the $7,034.01 he had spent on items such as family expenses and car repairs.

The comptroller general explained, "Travel advances are not meant to represent a final payment to which a traveler is entitled. Travelers who receive advance travel funds are on notice that they are entitled to be reimbursed only for legally authorized expenditures. If, during travel, a member does not spend the amount advanced to him on authorized expenses, he must return the balance."

Clearly, the federal sector would benefit from greater comprehension of federal travel rules. Recognizing this, near the end of 1996, GSA formed a task force to translate the Federal Travel Regulation into plain English.

Samuel Johnson said, "The use of traveling is to regulate imagination by reality, and instead of thinking how things may be, to see them as they are." Federal travel reform promises to do more than save the government money. Reformers are working on ways to simplify and humanize the process so that feds can concentrate on "regulating their imaginations" rather than regulations.

Post a Comment

To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.