BNUMBER: B-272613
DATE: October 16, 1996
TITLE: [Letter]
**********************************************************************
B-272613
October 16, 1996
S.M. Helmrich
Director
Financial Management Division
Department of Agriculture
Agricultural Research Service
Dear Mr. Helmrich:
This is in response to your June 28, 1996 request that we grant relief
from liability under 31 U.S.C. sec. 3527 to Dr. Quentin Jones, retired
former National Program Leader for the Agricultural Research Service
(ARS) Narcotics Program, for the unexplained loss of $13,900 from his
account. As explained in further detail below, based on the record
before us, we cannot grant relief.
Background
Between May 6, 1987 and June 22, 1990, Dr. Jones was a designated
Chief of Field Party (CFP) at international meetings sponsored in part
by ARS for foreign scientists. During this time he received five
field party advances which were intended to be used to cover expenses
of the scientists attending the meetings. In June 1990, Dr. Jones
requested his last advance of $5,500 which, added to the remaining
balance of previous advances of $8,400, totaled $13,900. On January
14, 1993, the National Finance Center (NFC) produced a Chief of Field
Party report which showed that Dr. Jones had an outstanding
unliquidated balance in his field party fund.[1] ARS contacted NFC
which verified that no vouchers had been submitted or received to
liquidate Dr. Jones' outstanding balance. ARS called its financial
management division to determine whether it had any original receipts
or vouchers to document Dr. Jones' expenses. The financial management
division found copies of some hand written notes by Dr. Jones' in his
file which indicated cash disbursements to persons between mid 1989
through the beginning of 1990. However, no vouchers or official
documentation substantiating any of these transactions were found. A
letter was sent to Dr. Jones' last known address requesting any
additional documentation he might have explaining the CFP outstanding
balance. There has been no response.
You advance several explanations on Dr. Jones' behalf regarding the
lack of documentation for the outstanding balance in his advance
account. First, you suggest that Dr. Jones' research work and trip
details were highly classified. You further suggest that for security
reasons it is "very possible" that some of the documentation is
missing. Second, you maintain that, according to his supervisors, Dr.
Jones' health was deteriorating quickly before he retired and that his
poor health condition "affected his ability to organize and submit the
required records and expense vouchers to liquidate the advance
balance, as he had responsibly done previously."
In addition, you request that relief be granted to Dr. Jones on the
theory that applicable agency regulations in effect at the time were
vague and ambiguous. The applicable agency regulation in effect when
Dr. Jones conducted his chief of field party activities was ARS
Directive 303.6, January 24, 1985. After that date, an agency
reorganization changed the responsible office for reviewing and
processing field party advance vouchers. The function was transferred
from the Financial Management Division to the Department of
Agriculture's National Finance Center. You assert that since that
directive was not amended to reflect this organizational change there
was some uncertainty over whom had oversight responsibility for field
party advances. Thus, since NFC did not follow-up to ensure that
advances were liquidated, you conclude that its lack of action is the
proximate result of the loss. You add that on March 7, 1994, a new
directive was issued to supersede the 1985 directive which requires
status of all field party advances to be reviewed quarterly.
Discussion
This Office is authorized to grant relief from liability upon its
concurrence with determinations by the Department or agency that (1)
the loss or deficiency occurred while the accountable officers or
agents were acting in the discharge of their official duties, or that
it occurred by reason of the acts or omissions of subordinates, and
(2) that the loss or deficiency occurred without fault or negligence
on the part of the accountable officers. 31 U.S.C. sec. 3527(a).
This shortage is an "unexplained loss". Although ARS advanced funds
to Dr. Jones, there is no evidence that he in any way accounted for
his use of these funds, i.e., expenses he may have incurred. Such an
unexplained loss of funds gives rise to personal liability on the part
of the officer accountable for the funds. The accountable officer may
be relieved of liability where evidence is provided that the loss
occured without fault or negligence by the accountable officer.
However, assertions of the absence of negligence, or mere
administrative determinations that there was no fault or negligence on
the part of the accountable officer are not sufficient to rebut the
presumption of negligence when unsupported by the evidence. B-238955,
April 3, 1991. The burden lies upon the accountable official to
establish due care.
The record submitted with your request does not offer any accounting
by Dr. Jones for the funds in his possession. Instead, you offer your
speculation as to why there is an absence of any accounting for the
funds entrusted to him. You assert that the unspecified but yet
classified nature of some of his activities could "possibly" have
affected his record keeping. This, however, has no bearing on Dr.
Jones' responsibilities as CFP to properly record dollar amounts and
dates of expenditures. Likewise, your second assertion, that his
health affected his abilities to account for the funds, does not
absolve Dr. Jones of his responsibilities as a custodian of public
funds. ARS Directive 303.6 rested primary responsibility for
operating and closing out the field party advances on the chief of
field party, Dr. Jones. His responsibilities and liability were
clearly outlined at the time, and, according to your letter, Dr. Jones
was familiar with and had complied with these regulations in the past:
" . . . CFP is personally liable to the Government for any losses
the Government may incur due to the CFP's actions or failure to
act . . ." 303.6 G.
"[CFP's must] Maintain a daily record of field party advance fund
transactions in U.S. dollars on AD-661; document all expenditures
with a receipt. If it is not possible to obtain a receipt from a
vendor, prepare and sign SF-1165; during field trip, prepare and
submit reimbursement vouchers . . . and receipt to Chief,
ASB-FMD. . ." 303.6 H.
"CLOSING OUT CFP ADVANCES
Upon completion of the field trip, return any unexpended funds
with a final SF-1129 to the Chief ASB-FMD. . . The responsibility
for the field party advance continues until proper accounting is
made to the Chief, ASB-FMD. [Chief, ASB-FMD] examine and verify
the final SF-1129 and process with NFC . . . If necessary recover
field party advance balances from the CFP's salary, lump-sum
leave payment, or retirement fund." 303.6 O.
Your letter explicitly states that, notwithstanding the transfer of
function from ASB-FMD, the NFC did receive and process Dr. Jones', and
presumably all other CFPs, "requests for field party advances,
maintained records of the advances, and processed related vouchers . .
. ." Although you admit the NFC compiled all of this information,
there is no evidence that Dr. Jones ever submitted any of the required
official records or documentation, particularly the final close-out
accountability report, either to NFC or to ASB-FMD in accordance with
the ARS directive. Other than the incomplete handwritten notes
discovered by your financial management division, there are no
official vouchers evidencing field party advance fund transactions
during 1989-1990. Moreover, there is no indication that NFC or FMD
systematically lost or failed to keep accurate records of vouchers and
receipts.
Your position that functions were transferred to NFC and that NFC did
not follow through with a timely audit of Dr. Jones' field advance has
no bearing on his apparent failure to prepare the required
accountability documents prescribed by Directive 303.6. Again, your
letter states that after the function was transferred the NFC did
receive and process Dr. Jones' requests for field party advances,
maintained records of the advances, and processed related vouchers for
Dr. Jones. It is true that the overseeing Agriculture office, whether
FMD or NFC, was required under 303.6 to institute the closing of a
field party advance and demand an immediate refund for any violations.
Directive 303.6 J4. However, it is not plausible that this delay was
the proximate cause of the loss.[2]
Accordingly, we are unable to concur with your conclusion that the
circumstances in this case overcome the accountable officers liability
for funds entrusted to him. Although we sympathize with Dr. Jone's
current medical condition and the difficulty that imposes on ARS and
others trying to account for the funds entrusted to him, the standards
for accountability of funds entrusted to accountable officers are
strict. Thus, we cannot grant relief on the basis of the record
presented at this time. Since Dr. Jones is a retired employee, we
recommend that you obtain his explanation and accounting for these
funds. If you are successful and if his explanation warrants, you
should resubmit a request for relief on his behalf.
Sincerely,
Gary L. Kepplinger
Associate General Counsel
B-272613
October 16, 1996
DIGEST
Where record submitted by agency in an unexplained loss case does not
offer any accounting by accountable officer for funds entrusted to him
and in his possession, relief of liability is denied to accountable
officer.
1. The record submitted reflects that the discrepancy was first noted
on March 31, 1992.
2. Accountable officers may be relieved from liability even if they
are found to have neglected their duties, if their negligence is not
the proximate cause of the loss or shortage. E.g., 63 Comp.Gen. 489,
492 (1984); B-235147, August 14, 1991.