BNUMBER:  B-280759 
DATE:  November 5, 1998
TITLE: [Letter], B-280759, November 5, 1998
**********************************************************************

B-280759

November 5, 1998

Mr. Jerome J. Markiewicz
Chief, Fiscal Management Division
    and Administrative Support
1206 Stanley Rd.
Ft. Sam Houston, TX 78234-5037

Dear Mr Markiewicz:

In your letter of August 5, 1998, you asked for informal advice 
concerning the use of Operation and Maintenance, Army, funds (O&M) to 
purchase business cards.  Your need for advice stems from a request 
for business cards for civilian personnel specialists of the Civilian 
Personnel Advisory Center (CPAC or Center).  CPAC is the Fort Sam 
Houston representative of the Department of the Army centralized 
Civilian Personnel Operating Center serving the southwestern United 
States.  The primary responsibility of CPAC is to act as a liaison 
between Army employing units and their employees, to provide advice 
and assistance to employers and employees, and to forward personnel 
actions and related documents to the Army's centralized center.  The 
civilian personnel specialists will use the business cards to provide 
the Center's customer an accurate reference to the specialist 
providing assistance and a precise electronic address for contacting 
the specialist--"a critical element in electronic correspondence, 
since neither phones nor electronic mail (e-mail) can redirect 
inaccurate deliveries."

As you point out, there has been a long history of Comptroller General 
decisions holding that appropriated funds may not be used to purchase 
business cards except in limited circumstances.  See, e.g., 68 Comp. 
Gen. 467 (1989); 41 Comp. Gen. 529 (1962); 12 Comp. Gen. 565 (1933).  
These decisions have been grounded on a narrow, if not an incorrect, 
understanding of the function and use of business cards.  Because of 
this, and notwithstanding the valuable information that business cards 
convey about an officer's or employee's office, these cards have been 
viewed as a personal, not an official expense.  I believe, however, 
that if this matter is analyzed from a "necessary expense" 
perspective, a more logical and legally defensible conclusion results.  

The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), Department of Justice (DOJ), 
recently advised the General Counsel of the General Services 
Administration (GSA) that GSA may use its appropriations to obtain 
business cards for suitable mission-related use by GSA employees.  
Memorandum for Emily C. Hewitt, General Counsel, GSA, from Richard L. 
Shiffrin, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, OLC, DOJ, August 11, 
1997.  OLC applied GAO's "necessary expense" analysis and concluded 
that "an agency head may reasonably determine that the appropriate use 
of business cards by agency employees who deal with outside 
organizations will further the agency's statutory mission and 
therefore constitutes a proper expenditure from its general 
appropriations." 

I agree with OLC's application of our "necessary expense" analysis to 
determine the availability of appropriated funds to obtain business 
cards for government employees who regularly deal with the public or 
organizations outside their immediate office.  Based on the 
representations made in your letter, a "necessary expense" analysis 
would appear to support the conclusion that the purchase of business 
cards by CPAC is a proper use of Army O&M appropriations.  
Accordingly, we would not object if the Secretary of the Army, or his 
delegate, concludes that purchase of business cards for use by CPAC 
civilian personnel specialists is a "necessary expense" of the Army 
O&M account.  I trust that this position makes it unnecessary to 
address the specific questions you posed in your letter.  

Sincerely yours,

Gary L. Kepplinger
Associate General Counsel