B-140417, AUGUST 19, 1959, 39 COMP. GEN. 119

B-140417, AUGUST 19, 1959, 39 COMP. GEN. 119

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL - TRAINING - PER DIEM ALLOWANCE - AT HEADQUARTERS - NECESSARY TRAINING EXPENSE UPON DETERMINATION BY THE HEAD OF A DEPARTMENT UNDER SECTION 10 OF THE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES TRAINING ACT THAT THE PAYMENT OF A STIPULATED SUM A DAY, WHICH INCLUDES MEALS AND ROOM FOR A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE AT HIS HEADQUARTERS WHILE PARTICIPATING IN A TRAINING PROGRAM, IS A NECESSARY TRAINING EXPENSE, NO OBJECTION TO THE PAYMENT WILL BE MADE EVEN THOUGH A PER DIEM ALLOWANCE IN LIEU OF SUBSISTENCE MAY NOT BE AUTHORIZED FOR EMPLOYEE WHO IS NOT IN A TRAVEL STATUS.

TO THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE, AUGUST 19, 1959:

ON AUGUST 6, 1959, THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE REQUESTED OUR DECISION WHETHER IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES SET FORTH BELOW PAYMENT OF $12 PER DAY MAY BE MADE TO AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE WHILE ATTENDING A TRAINING COURSE IN THE SAME LOCALITY AS HIS HEADQUARTERS.

THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE SAYS THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT HAS HAD OCCASIONS IN THE PAST TO ASSIGN CERTAIN PERSONNEL TO ATTEND THE " PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT FOR EXECUTIVES CONFERENCE" CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY AT THE CLAREMONT HOTEL, BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA. THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY REQUIRES THAT THOSE WHO ATTEND THE COURSE MUST "LIVE-IN" AT THE CLAREMONT HOTEL DURING THE PERIOD OF THE COURSE. IT IS INDICATED THAT DINNER MEETING SESSIONS, AND OTHER MEETINGS, WHICH ARE CONSIDERED AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE COURSE ARE CONDUCTED IN THE EVENINGS. ARRANGEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WITH THE HOTEL CLAREMONT TO HOUSE ALL PARTICIPANTS AT A COST OF $12 PER DAY WHICH INCLUDES MEALS AND ROOM.

IT IS PROPOSED THAT AN EMPLOYEE WHOSE OFFICIAL STATION IS IN BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA, BE ASSIGNED TO TAKE THE COURSE DURING THE PERIOD AUGUST 19 TO AUGUST 28, 1959, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE PAY THE NECESSARY EXPENSES. THE DOUBT IN THE MATTER ARISES BECAUSE THE TRAINING WILL TAKE PLACE AT THE EMPLOYEE'S DESIGNATED POST OF DUTY AND PER DIEM ALLOWANCE IN LIEU OF SUBSISTENCE MAY NOT PROPERLY BE AUTHORIZED SINCE THE EMPLOYEE WOULD NOT BE IN A TRAVEL STATUS.

THE SPECIFIC QUESTION SUBMITTED FOR A DECISION IS WHETHER YOUR DEPARTMENT MAY EITHER AUTHORIZE THE EMPLOYEE TO INCUR THE EXPENSES CONNECTED WITH THE USE OF HOTEL SERVICE OF FACILITIES AND REIMBURSE HIM, OR PROCURE THE SERVICES DIRECTLY FROM THE CLAREMONT HOTEL AND ASSIGN THE EMPLOYEE TO USE THE SERVICES SO PROVIDED.

SECTION 10 OF THE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES TRAINING ACT, PUBLIC LAW 85-507, 5 U.S.C. 2309, PROVIDES, IN PART, AS FOLLOWS:

SEC. 10. THE HEAD OF EACH DEPARTMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH REGULATIONS ISSUED BY THE COMMISSION UNDER AUTHORITY OF SECTION 6 (A) (8) IS AUTHORIZED FROM FUNDS APPROPRIATED OR OTHERWISE AVAILABLE TO SUCH DEPARTMENT * * * (2) TO PAY, OR REIMBURSE SUCH EMPLOYEE FOR ALL OR ANY PART OF THE NECESSARY EXPENSES OF SUCH TRAINING, WITHOUT REGARD TO SECTION 3648 OF THE REVISED STATUTES (31 U.S.C. 529), INCLUDING AMONG EXPENSES THE NECESSARY COST OF * * * (F) OTHER SERVICES OR FACILITIES DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE TRAINING OF SUCH EMPLOYEE. * * *

CONCERNING REGULATIONS ISSUED BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO PUBLIC LAW 85-507, SECTION 39.401 OF THE FEDERAL PERSONNEL MANUAL, CHAPTER T-1-22, TRAINING, PROVIDES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 39.401. DETERMINATION OF NECESSARY EXPENSES OF TRAINING. THE HEAD OF EACH DEPARTMENT SHALL DETERMINE WHICH EXPENSES CONSTITUTE NECESSARY TRAINING EXPENSES UNDER SECTION 10 OF THE ACT.

ON PAGE 22 OF HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT NO. 1951, 85TH CONGRESS, TO ACCOMPANY S. 385, WHICH BECAME PUBLIC LAW 85-507, IT IS SAID IN PART:

* * * THE SECTION ALSO AUTHORIZES THE DEPARTMENT HEAD TO COVER THE NECESSARY EXPENSES OF AN EMPLOYEE IN TRAINING EITHER BY REIMBURSING HIM FOR THOSE EXPENSES OR BY PROVIDING MONEY IN ADVANCE IN ANTICIPATION OF SUCH EXPENSES. THE NECESSARY EXPENSES INCLUDE * * * OTHER EXPENSES DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE TRAINING OF SUCH EMPLOYEE.

UNDER THE APPLICABLE LAW AND REGULATIONS, IF YOU SHOULD DETERMINE THAT THE EXPENSES HERE IN QUESTION ARE NECESSARY TRAINING EXPENSES WE WOULD INTERPOSE NO OBJECTION THERETO, AND UPON THAT BASIS THE SPECIFIC QUESTION PRESENTED IS ANSWERED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.