_______________________ October 2, 1997 ________________________ GSBCA 14060-TRAV In the Matter of COLIN B. BROWN Colin B. Brown, Galena, AK, Claimant. David B. Allen, Acting Regional Director, Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, AK, appearing for Department of the Interior. PARKER, Board Judge. Colin B. Brown, a pilot for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at the Koyukuk/Nowitna National Wildlife refuge in Galena, Alaska, was sent to Lakeland, Florida for flight training in February 1995. The travel was scheduled to last from on or about February 6 though on or about April 4. Mr. Brown's travel authorization stated that his per diem allowance would be $57 per day for lodging and $26 per day for meals and incidental expenses. The travel authorization also stated that use of a rental vehicle was authorized. During the period of travel, Mr. Brown rented a condominium apartment for $50 per day, which he states was the least expensive place he could find in a safe neighborhood. He also rented a car. Although the training ended late on Friday, March 31, Mr. Brown was unable to find a flight out of Orlando (the closest airport) until Monday, April 3. During this weekend, Mr. Brown kept his rental car and spent two nights with relatives in Lakeland, which is about fifty miles from the airport in Orlando. Mr. Brown's return flight arrived in Fairbanks, Alaska late in the evening on April 3. There were no flights to Galena until the next morning. Mr. Brown's wife had come to Fairbanks to meet him, and they stayed in a hotel that night and flew home to Galena the next day. Mrs. Brown had rented a car for use in Fairbanks. Mr. Brown challenges the disallowance of several items claimed on his travel voucher. First, the agency reduced Mr. Brown's total per diem allowance to $45.65 per day, or fifty-five percent of the authorized amount. This was done because, according to the agency, "when travel exceeds thirty days the per diem rate must be reduced to fifty-five percent of the maximum per Financial Administration Memorandum 94-037." In addition, because the training ended on March 31, the agency disallowed Mr. Brown's claim for per diem for meals and incidental expenses for April 1-2, and his claim for the rental car for those days. Finally, the agency disallowed Mr. Brown's per diem claim for April 3-4, and his claim for a rental car during that period, because the "stopover in Fairbanks was not authorized." Discussion Per diem reduction A federal employee who travels on official business is entitled to be paid a per diem allowance at a rate not to exceed the rate established by the Administrator of General Services. 5 U.S.C.  5702 (1994). The Administrator of General Services, in the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR), established a maximum rate of $57 per day for lodging and $26 per day for meals and incidental expenses during the relevant time period in the Lakeland, Florida area. The FTR emphasizes that the per diem rates it establishes are maximum rates, and it provides that an agency may authorize a per diem rate that is less than the maximum rate in certain circumstances. One such circumstance is when an employee is assigned to training at a temporary duty station for more than thirty calendar days. In such cases, under regulations promulgated by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) pursuant to the Government Employees Training Act, 5 U.S.C.  4101-4118 (1994), an employee is entitled to a reduced per diem of not more than fifty- five percent of the applicable maximum rate. 41 CFR 301-7.14 (1995). The agency may pay per diem up to the maximum rate only with proper justification, i.e., after documenting the circumstances which led the agency to conclude that the higher payment would be in the public interest. Id.; 5 CFR 410.603 (1995) (OPM regulations). Regardless of what Mr. Brown's travel authorization stated about the applicable per diem rates, he is not entitled to be paid more than the amount permitted by regulation. That amount is equal to fifty-five percent of the maximum rate, unless a greater amount can be justified. Mr. Brown has claimed that he was unable to rent an apartment in a safe neighborhood for less than $50 per day. If this is true, he is entitled to be paid that amount for lodging. The agency never investigated Mr. Brown's claim as to the condition of the rental market in Lakeland, Florida, however. It should do so now and, if justified, adjust the lodging component of the rate accordingly. As to the reduced rate for the meals and incidental expenses component of the daily per diem ($14.30 per day), Mr. Brown has presented no evidence which would lead us to conclude that a higher rate could be justified. Since Mr. Brown's apartment presumably contained a kitchen, he reasonably could be expected to prepare meals at home, rather than going to restaurants. April 1-2 Mr. Brown's training ended late in the day on Friday, March 31. Mr. Brown states that he was unable to get a flight out of Orlando until Monday, April 3. He stayed with family during the weekend of April 1-2, and kept his rental car, which he used to go to the airport in Orlando on April 3. The agency's disallowance of Mr. Brown's claims for meals and incidental expenses for April 1-2, and for his rental car, was in error. If Mr. Brown was unable to get a flight home until Monday, April 3 -- and there is no evidence to the contrary -- then he should be paid per diem for those days, if otherwise allowable. Under these circumstances, his stay in Florida over the weekend should be considered as Government, rather than personal, business. The same reasoning applies to Mr. Brown's claim for the rental car. Rental of a car had been previously authorized, and the car was used to go to the home at which Mr. Brown stayed over the weekend (at no cost to the Government) and to return to the airport on Monday morning. Under the circumstances, this should be considered as part of Mr. Brown's official travel. April 3-4 Mr. Brown's return flight arrived in Fairbanks late in the evening of April 3. Because there were no flights to Galena until the next morning, he stayed in a hotel that night and flew home the next day. The agency denied Mr. Brown's claim for per diem expenses for April 3-4 because the "stopover in Fairbanks was not authorized." The agency also disallowed reimbursement for a car that Mr. Brown's wife had rented in connection with her trip to Fairbanks to meet her husband. The agency's disallowance of Mr. Brown's claim for per diem for the Fairbanks stopover was in error. Similar to the situation in Lakeland on April 1-2, if Mr. Brown was unable to get a flight to Galena on the evening of April 3 -- and there is no evidence to the contrary -- he is entitled to be paid per diem up until the time he actually arrived home. As to the car rented by Mrs. Brown, the agency properly denied reimbursement. There is no evidence that the car was necessary for the conduct of Government business. Decision The claim is granted in part to the extent discussed above. _________________________ ROBERT W. PARKER Board Judge