Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

Brawley v. United States, 96 U. S. 168..
Brewster v. Gage, 280 U. S. 327.
Brooks-Callaway Co., United States v., 318
U. S. 120..

Brown v. United States, 113 U. S. 568...
Brownlee, et al. v. Mutual Benefit Health and
Accident Assn., 29 F. 2d 71.....
Burlington Grocery Co. v. Heaphy's Estate,
98 Vt. 122, 126 A. 525.
Carnegie Steel Co. v. Connelly, 89 N. J. L. 1,
97 A 774...

Centaur Construction Co., Inc. v. United States, C. Cls. No. 46242, decided Jan. 6, 1947.

Chamberlain v. Iowa Telephone Co., 119 Iowa 619, 93 N. W. 596.

[blocks in formation]

Chase v. Martin, 183 A. 726..

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

341

Commercial Cable Co. v. Burleson, 255 F. 99.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue . Riley
Stoker Corporation, 67 F. 2d 688..
Conti, United States v. (C. C. A. 1), 119 F. 2d
652..

Cook, et al. v. Chicago R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 46
N. W. 1080..

Coulter v. Sausalito Bay Water Co., 10 P. 2d 780...

Crain Co. v. Arizona State Tax Commission, et al., 163 P. 2d 656.

Davis v. Newton Coal Co., 267 U. S. 292.
Day v. United States, 245 U. S. 159.
Denwood v. Public Service Commission, 83
S. E. 295..

Detrich v. Howard, 155 F. 2d 307.
Doyle v. United States, 46 C. Cls. 181.
Dugan v. United States, 34 C. Cls. 458..
Elias . Whitney, 98 N. Y. Supp. 667.
Elqui, The (ex Selma), et al., 62 F. Supp. 764.......
Fanning v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of
the U. S., 107 A. 715..

Farley. Abbetmeier, 114 F. 2d 569, 72 App.
D. C. 260...

Fassett, In re., 142 U. S. 479.

Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Md. v. United States, 55 F. 2d 100..

Fishgold v. Sullivan Dry Dock & Repair Corp. et al., 328 U. S. 275.

Fleming . Mohawk Co., S. Ct. Nos. 583 and
512, decided Apr. 12, 1947.
Frazier-Davis Construction Co. v. United
States, ICO C. Cls. 120..

658 Medbury v. United States, 173 U. S. 492.. Merchants' Nat. Bk. v. Carmichael, 196 P. 76.. 595 Merwin v. United States, 78 C. Cls. 561.

Midland Co. v. K. C. Power Co., 300 U. S. 109.

6 Miguel v. McCarl, et al. (1934), 291 U. S. 442.. Miller v. United States, 19 C. Cls. 338.

19 Mills v. United States, 19 C. Cls. 79..

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

207 584

271

584

38

290

590

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Genna v. Continental Casualty Co., 167 III. App. 413..

[blocks in formation]

135

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

178 Myerle v. United States, 31 C. Cls. 105.

691

727

[blocks in formation]

21 National Bank ». Burkhardt, 100 U. S. 686....

728

[blocks in formation]

Ockenfels ». United States, 107 C. Cls. 150.... Ogden & Dougherty v. United States, 102 C. Cls. 249...

Ohio . Thomas, 173 U. S. 276.. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co., United States ., 297 F. 575... O'Rourke, Timothy E. v. United States, C. Cls. No. 46657, decided June 2, 1947. Osceola, City of v. Middle States Utilities Co., 257 N. W. 340 (Iowa)..

Overnight Motor Transportation Co. v. Missel, 316 U. S. 572..

[blocks in formation]

19, 719, 727

273, 373

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

DECISIONS

OF THE

COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES

(B-66287)

TRANSPORTATION-TO AND FROM WORK-GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES While it may be impracticable for employees stationed at Fairbanks, Alaska, to obtain cheaper means of transportation than by taxicab due to the emergency or unusual conditions existing at such post of duty, the cost of furnishing taxicab service to employees between the office and their homes and between office and places where meals are procured is to be regarded as a personal expense which may not be paid from appropriated funds in the absence of express or implied authority therefor in the current appropriation. Comptroller General Warren to T. V. O'Rourke, War Assets Administration, July 1, 1947:

Reference is made to your letter of May 8, 1947, to the Chief, Audit Division, General Accounting Office, as follows:

The Surplus Property Office, Department of Interior, Anchorage, Alaska, recently went under the administration of the War Assets Administration.

Prior to the transfer the War Assets Administration operated an office for aircraft disposal in Fairbanks, Alaska. Since this office became the Regional Headquarters for WAA in the Territory of Alaska we became the clearing house for all expenses incurred by the agency.

When the enclosed voucher was submitted for payment, this office took exception to the expense and refused to process the voucher. Mr. Smith, District Manager at Fairbanks was advised and he countered with the enclosed letter as authority to obligate the expense.

This office contends that the use of taxicabs to and from work is not official travel within the limits of their duty station and therefore not a justifiable expense. It is requested that the enclosed voucher be pre-audited by your office and correspondence forwarded advising if said voucher may be certified for payment. The referred-to letter of November 8, 1946, from the War Assets Administration in Washington, D. C., to M. Clifford Smith, Jr., special representative, Fairbanks, Alaska, which, you state, Mr. Smith cites as authority to obligate the expense, reads as follows:

There has been referred to this office for reply your memorandum of October 23rd to Mr. L. Oliver Cook, Office of Aircraft Disposal, Washington, with respect to the matter of obtaining transportation for personnel of the Fairbanks office. It appears that your problem is two-fold, involving the transportation of employees from point to point on official business call and also their transportation to down-town Fairbanks for food and lodging. As you know, it is normally incumbent upon every employee to report to and from work at his own expense

1

and by means provided by himself, this obligation extending also to whatever travel may be necessary for the mid-day meal.

However, it is recognized that conditions at Fairbanks as regards transportation facilities at all times and severe weather conditions for a portion of the time created a situation out of the ordinary. Accordingly, there is no objection, legal or otherwise, to the continued obtainment of transportation facilities for the travel discussed herein and as may be further required in the conduct of the business of the office. Although your letter is not specific on the point we understand that bills for the rental of the automobile at $150 per month have been paid at least up to March 25, 1946, the date on which the War Assets Administration was established. If not, payment may be made without further delay and payment may also be made of any additional bills for the service for periods through June 30, 1946, even though no contract had been executed. Beginning July 1, 1946, the rental service must be covered by a contract which must be negotiated and executed by the office of Mr. J. W. Abney, Chief Contracts Officer, Office of Personnel and Office Services, WAA, Washington 25, D. C., The matter has been cleared informally with Mr. Abney's office and if you will supply him immediately with all pertinent facts, the contract will be drawn retroactive to July 1, 1946, and, in view of the circumstances, will be without regard to the requirements of Section 3709 of the Revised Statutes, which requires competitive bidding.

The use of taxicabs for employee transportation should be held to a minimum and the arrangements for the service should be between the office and the operators wherever possible. That is to say, an attempt should be made to place this service on a definite charge basis and if advisable a contract should be negotiated to place the service on call. In the event you decide that this would be the proper course, you should supply all information to Mr. Abney's office as explained above.

We have noted that you anticipate that your expenditures for gasoline and oil for the rented vehicle plus the cost of occasional taxicab use should never exceed $50 in any one month. Accordingly, the open market limitation of $100 permitting miscellaneous procurement as needed when the individual amounts do not exceed $100 and when the services are of a casual nature, provided adequate authority for these miscellaneous services and you may proceed with the procuring thereof without formal contract.

We trust that the information contained herein will be of assistance to you. A copy of this memorandum has been sent by us to Mr. Abney's office in order that he may be informed more fully in the matter. You should communicate promptly with Mr. Abney, as explained above. If we may provide further clarification or any additional assistance, please advise.

While your letter requests that the submitted voucher be "preaudited" it is assumed that you, in your capacity as certifying officer, intended to submit the matter here for an advance decision by this office under the provisions of section 3 of the act of December 29, 1941, 55 Stat. 876, and the matter will be treated accordingly. However, it should be pointed out that all requests made by certifying officers under said statute for advance decisions should be addressed to the Comptroller General of the United States, Washington 25, D. C.

The submitted voucher covers claim by the Pioneer Taxi at Fairbanks, Alaska, in the amount of $120.75, for services rendered the War Assets Administration at Fairbanks during the period from January 15 to February 7, 1947, inclusive, which voucher is supported by confirming purchase order dated April 10, 1947, and certified invoices showing charges ranging from $1 to $2.50, itemized to show. trips as follows for: "5 pass., 4 stops," "Girls to work, 1 stop," "Girls

« ÎnapoiContinuă »