Board of Contract Appeals General Services Administration Washington, D.C. 20405 _________________ February 27, 1998 _________________ GSBCA 14203-TRAV In the Matter of ROY W. ROTH Roy W. Roth, Chapel Hill, NC, Claimant. Bobby A. Derrick, Director, Accounting Support Directorate, Defense Finance and Accounting Service, Indianapolis Center, Indianapolis, IN, appearing for Department of Defense. PARKER, Board Judge. Dr. Roy Roth, a civilian employee of the Department of the Army in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, was sent on temporary duty to Jackson Hole, Wyoming in September 1995. According to the Army, the cost of a round-trip Government ticket was $1,347. Dr. Roth planned to stop for personal reasons in Denver, Colorado. When he found that the stopover would cost him an additional $260, Dr. Roth decided to use his personal frequent flyer miles to obtain a round-trip ticket from Raleigh-Durham to Denver. After telling Dr. Roth initially that reimbursement for the value of the trip "seemed fair," the Government travel office informed him a few days before the trip that he could not be reimbursed for a ticket "purchased" with frequent flyer miles. Dr. Roth went ahead as planned and filed a claim which included a charge of $352, which was the Government contract price for a round-trip ticket from Raleigh-Durham to Denver, as well as a $50 fee which Dr. Roth incurred in connection with redemption of the mileage credits.[foot #] 1 The round-trip ticket from Denver to Jackson Hole cost the Government $446, for a total airfare of $848 using Dr. Roth's methodology. The agency denied Dr. Roth's claim for the value of the Raleigh-Durham to Denver portion of his trip because he used frequent flyer miles to obtain it. Dr. Roth has asked the Board to review that denial. ----------- FOOTNOTE BEGINS --------- [foot #] 1 The agency has now agreed to reimburse him for the $50 fee. As discussed below, reimbursement of this fee is proper. ----------- FOOTNOTE ENDS ----------- Discussion By regulation, federal employees are permitted to travel by an indirect route for their own convenience as long as they bear the additional expense. Reimbursement in such cases is based on "such charges as would have been incurred by a usually traveled route." 41 CFR 301-2.5(b) (1995). An employee may not use airline service provided under contract with the General Services Administration for that portion of travel by an indirect route which is for personal convenience. Id. This provision is an exception to the general rule that the Government will not pay for personal travel; in the case of indirect route travel, the Government will pay the cost of combined personal and official travel, up to the amount which it would have paid for a direct route to the temporary duty location. Thus, if Dr. Roth had paid for the Raleigh-Durham to Denver leg of his trip with cash, or by check or credit card, there would be no doubt that he would be entitled to reimbursement in full from the Government, since the amount he is requesting is less than the cost of direct route travel. Dr. Roth did not pay for the Raleigh-Durham to Denver leg of his journey with cash, check or credit card, however. He paid instead with frequent flyer miles. The agency denied Dr. Roth's request for reimbursement because of a line of decisions by the Comptroller General holding that reimbursement may not be made when there is no actual expenditure of funds by the traveling employee. In the cited cases, the Comptroller General denied reimbursement for such things as the value of a flight "paid for" with an airline voucher obtained by voluntarily vacating a seat on an over-booked flight, Joel R. Zaientz, 65 Comp. Gen. 182 (1986), and a ticket "purchased" with the employee's husband's frequent flyer miles, Martha C. Biernaski, 65 Comp. Gen. 171 (1985). In a frequently-cited case, Philip E. Trickett, B-224054 (Mar. 17, 1987), the Comptroller General refused to reimburse an employee who claimed reimbursement for a $50 coupon which he used to obtain a discount on a flight for official travel. The Comptroller General reasoned that, although the coupon had a value, the employee did not actually incur any expenses when he used the coupon. Moreover, according to the Comptroller General, "to allow reimbursement to an employee who has used personally obtained discount coupons compounds the problems of control and accountability." Id. at 2. Given the lack of specific regulatory authority to reimburse an employee for the value of a ticket obtained through the use of frequent flyer miles, we think that the Comptroller General's analysis makes sense. Although Dr. Roth's frequent flyer miles clearly had some value, the only out-of-pocket expenditure he incurred was the $50 fee for redeeming the mileage. The "value" of such things as personal frequent flyer miles, coupons and vouchers is subject to interpretation. In the absence of regulatory guidance on the subject, the agency was correct in denying Dr. Roth's claim for reimbursement of the "value" of his frequent flyer miles. Decision For the reasons discussed above, the claim is denied. ________________________ ROBERT W. PARKER Board Judge