BNUMBER:  B-261440
DATE:  September 9, 1996
TITLE:  Dr. Dietrich A. Volmer

**********************************************************************

Matter of:Dr. Dietrich A. Volmer

File:     B-261440

Date:September 9, 1996

DIGEST

Certification of payment is disallowed for currency exchange losses, 
fees, and handling charges incurred by an individual on official 
government travel within the United States involving the use of his 
personal credit card issued by a foreign bank since the use of such a 
card is a matter of personal convenience and not directly related to 
official travel.  Additionally, as a general rule, the risk of 
incurring an exchange loss upon converting currency for the purpose of 
official travel lies with the individual, whether the loss is incurred 
in a foreign country or in the United States.

DECISION

This advance decision is made at the request of Wayne S. Bladen, an 
authorized certifying officer, Office of Financial Management, Food 
and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, to 
determine whether he may certify for payment of certain expenses 
resulting from the use of a private credit card incurred by a 
nongovernment employee, Dr. Dietrich A. Volmer, pursuant to officially 
authorized travel to his temporary duty station in Los Angeles, 
California, from February 27, 1995, through March 25, 1995.  Dr. 
Volmer was a postdoctoral fellow appointed under the Oak Ridge 
Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) program of the Public 
Health Service, Department of Health & Human Services.  As a 
nongovernment employee, agency policy determined that he could not be 
issued a U.S. government credit card.  Otherwise, the ORISE travel 
policy explicitly provided that travel benefits to these nongovernment 
employees would be comparable to those of government employees

BACKGROUND

From February 27, 1995, through March 25, 1995, Dr. Volmer and another 
colleague were assigned to temporary duty in Los Angeles, California, 
from their permanent duty station in Arkansas.  Dr. Volmer chose to 
rent an apartment in Marina del Rey during this period, rather than 
stay in a hotel.  Since Dr. Volmer was not authorized a government 
credit card, he applied for a cash advance.  Although the advance was 
promised him on Friday, February 24, just prior to his departure, it 
was not available at that time.  Consequently, he indicates he could 
not deposit it into his bank until Wednesday, February 28, 1 day after 
his arrival in California.

Dr. Volmer states he did not have enough cash on hand to prepay the 
apartment where he chose to reside during his temporary duty 
assignment, and the apartment managers insisted on 1 month's 
prepayment of $2,350 for stays lasting less than      1 month, as was 
the case here.  Dr. Volmer states that since the existing credit limit 
on his Visa card, apparently drawn on a U.S. bank, was not enough to 
handle this expense, he decided to charge the amount to his German 
Mastercard.  In addition to the amount charged, the German bank 
issuing the Mastercard added a 1% fee for payments in currencies other 
than marks (in this case, U.S. dollars) and handling charges.  Dr. 
Volmer also incurred currency losses due to the fact that the German 
mark exchange rate increased from 1.38 to almost 1.47 to the U.S. 
dollar in the short interval between the time the charge was made and 
Dr. Volmer sent in his credit card payment.  As a result, Dr. Volmer 
incurred additional costs of $180.75 for fees, handling charges, and 
exchange rate losses as a result of using his German Mastercard while 
on temporary duty in Los Angeles.  The authorized certifying officer 
requests an advance decision concerning the propriety of this payment.

ANALYSIS

Under Section 5706 of Title 5, United States Code, only actual and 
necessary expenses incurred by government employees traveling on 
official business away from their duty stations may be allowed.  
Implementing the statute, the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) (41 
C.F.R. Part 301-9) further authorizes the payment of certain 
miscellaneous expenses which may be incurred by employees in the 
performance of their duty.  For example, allowable miscellaneous 
expenses may include the cost of travelers checks purchased in 
connection with an employee's official travel.  (41 C.F.R.  sec.  
301-9(c)).

As a general rule, the risk of incurring an exchange loss upon 
converting currency advanced for the purpose of temporary duty in a 
foreign country lies with the employee or member.  An individual who 
receives a travel advance in U.S. dollars and who chooses to convert 
all or a portion of the advance into a foreign currency, for whatever 
reason and by whatever means, is generally liable for any losses he 
incurs due to a currency devaluation.  By the same token, he is not 
responsible to account for any gain he may realize as the result of a 
favorable rate of exchange.  Sergeant First Class Lindsay C. 
Harrington, B-222267, October 10, 1986.  See also Chester M. Purdy, 63 
Comp. Gen. 554 (1984).

The use of a private credit card drawn on a foreign bank, and thus 
involving currency losses on the exchange of funds at that particular 
time, was Dr. Volmer's own decision and was not a U.S. government 
requirement.  Nor was it a requirement that he rent this particular 
apartment with prepayment obligations rather than another one for the 
time spent on temporary duty in Los Angeles.

We have stated that use of a personal credit card is a matter of 
personal convenience and not directly related to official travel.  An 
individual on official travel using a private credit card is not 
obligated to account to the government for any cash or credit rebate 
he receives for such use of his card and such rebates are not the 
property of the government.  Richard E. Stuart, 72 Comp. Gen. 252 
(1993).  Similarly, any losses incurred by an individual regarding the 
use of such card are not the responsibility of the government.  While 
the FTR at 41 C.F.R.  sec.  301-9.1(c)(1) permits reimbursement for 
commissions for the conversion of currency when foreign travel is 
involved, the expenses here were caused by the use of the foreign 
credit card, not foreign travel.  The individual was on temporary duty 
in the United States from his permanent duty station, which was also 
in the United States.

The choice of payment mechanism in this case was personal on the part 
of the individual.  See Department of Transportation--Inspector 
General--Bonus Points for Use of Personal Credit Cards for Certain 
Travel Expenses, B-270423, July 1, 1996.  Just as the government 
should have no claim to any discounts or rebates which might accrue to 
an individual on official travel through the use of a personal credit 
card, it also would not be obligated to reimburse that individual for 
any finance charges or annual fees incurred incident to the use of a 
personal credit card in connection with official travel.  Use of 
Discover Charge Cards, B-236219, May 4, 1990.

Applying these criteria to the case at hand, we would object to 
certification of payment for currency exchange losses, fees, and 
handling charges incurred by an individual on official government 
travel within the United States involving the use of his personal 
credit card issued by a foreign bank since the use of such a card is a 
matter of personal convenience and not directly related to official 
travel.  Additionally, as a general rule, the risk of incurring an 
exchange loss upon converting currency for the purpose of official 
travel lies with the individual, whether the loss is incurred in a 
foreign country or in the United States.

/s/Seymour Efros
for Robert P. Murphy
General Counsel