TITLE:  Scope of Professional Credentials Statute, B-302548, August 20, 2004
BNUMBER:  B-302548
DATE:  August 20, 2004
**********************************************************************
   Decision

   Matter of:   Scope of Professional Credentials Statute

   File:            B-302548

   Date:           August 20, 2004

   DIGEST

   Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. S 5757(a), federal agencies are authorized to use
appropriated funds to pay an employee*s expenses to obtain professional
credentials.  However, an agency may pay only the expenses required to
obtain the license or official certification needed to practice a
particular profession, including licensing fees and examinations to obtain
credentials.  Accordingly, sectionA 5757(a) does not authorize the agency
to pay for an employee*s membership in a professional association unless
membership is a prerequisite to obtaining the professional license or
certification.  Under 5 U.S.C. S 5946 payment for voluntary memberships in
organizations of already-credentialed professionals is prohibited, and
section 5757(a) does not provide any authority to pay such fees.

   DECISION

   Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. S 3529(a), a certifying officer at the Department of
Agriculture*s Risk Management Agency requested an advance decision whether
section 5757(a) of title 5, United States Code, authorizes an agency to
pay for an employee*s membership in a professional association if
membership is not a requirement for obtaining a license or certification. 
Section 5757(a) allows federal agencies to use appropriated funds to pay
the expenses of an employee to obtain professional credentials.  As
explained below, sectionA 5757(a) does not authorize agencies to pay for
the membership of an employee in a professional association unless
membership is a prerequisite for the employee to obtain required
credentials, such as a license to practice a profession.  Payment of the
cost of voluntary membership in a group of professionals who are already
credentialed is prohibited by 5A U.S.C. S 5946.

   BACKGROUND

   A Risk Management Agency employee asked the agency to pay for her
Certified Public Accountant (CPA) license as well as membership in the
California Society of Certified Public Accountants (CalCPA).  Membership
in CalCPA is voluntary and not a prerequisite to obtaining a CPA
license.[1]  In addition to the payment of a license fee, applicants for a
CPA license in California have to meet certain education and experience
requirements, pass the Uniform CPA Examination and the California
Professional Ethics Examination, undergo a criminal history record check,
and, once licensed, meet continuing education and license renewal
requirements.  See California Board of Accountancy, Information Handbook
for the Certified Public Accountant Applicant, No.A 11A-54 (January
2004).[2]

   A Risk Management Agency certifying officer determined that the agency had
the authority to pay the CPA license fee pursuant to 5 U.S.C. S 5757(a),
which reads in relevant part as follows:

   *(a) An agency may use appropriated funds or funds otherwise available to
the agency to pay for --

   (1) expenses for employees to obtain professional credentials, including
expenses for professional accreditation, State-imposed and professional
licenses, and professional certification; and

   (2) examinations to obtain such credentials.*

   Because the certifying officer was uncertain whether section 5757(a)
applied to a membership fee that was not a condition of obtaining the CPA
license, the certifying officer asked us for an advance decision under 31
U.S.C. S 3529(a) whether section 5757(a) authorizes an agency to use
appropriated funds for membership in a professional society or association
if such membership is not a condition for obtaining the credentials
required to practice that profession. 

   ANALYSIS

   Professional Credentials

   Generally, personal expenses are not payable from appropriated funds
absent specific statutory authority.  B-261729, Apr. 1, 1996; 72 Comp.
Gen. 225, 227 (1993).  We have held that expenses necessary to qualify a
government employee to do his or her job are personal expenses, and as
such, are not chargeable to appropriated funds.  61 Comp. Gen.A 357
(1982).  As we explained in B-286026, June 12, 2001, as early as 1890 the
Supreme Court held that *it is the duty of persons receiving appointments
from the government  .  .  .  to qualify themselves for the office.*
United States v. Duzee, 140 U.S. 169, 171 (1890).  Our decisions have
applied this rule on numerous occasions.  In 61 Comp. Gen.A 357 (1982),
for example, we held that an agency could not pay the costs of bar review
courses or bar membership fees for its  attorneys because these expenses
are personal expenses related to qualifying for office.  See also
Ba**260771, Oct. 11, 1995 (appropriated funds could not be used to cover
the cost of obtaining a Certified Government Manager designation); 46
Comp. Gen. 695 (1976) (appropriated funds could not be used for medical
licensing fees for Public Health Service physicians).

   In December 2001, Congress specifically provided agencies the authority to
use appropriated funds to pay expenses for their employees to obtain
professional credentials.  National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-107, S 1112(a), 115 Stat. 1012, 1238 (Dec.A 28,
2001), codified at 5 U.S.C. S 5757.[3]  But for this statutory authority,
appropriations would not be available for this purpose.  61A Comp.
Gen.A 357 (1982).  The statutory language does not create an entitlement
to payment; instead, it authorizes agencies to consider such expenses as
payable from agency appropriations if the agency chooses to cover them.  

   Consistent with our regular practice, we solicited the Department*s legal
position on the use of Risk Management Agency appropriations to pay for an
employee*s membership in CalCPA.  Letter from Thomas H. Armstrong,
Assistant General Counsel, U.S. General Accounting Office, to Nancy
Bryson, General Counsel, U.S.A Department of Agriculture, Mar. 5, 2004. 
The Department has advised us that membership in CalCPA is not an
authorized agency expenditure because it is neither tied directly to
obtaining official documentation of professional authority nor is it a
prerequisite to obtaining such documentation.  Letter from Kenneth E.
Cohen, Assistant General Counsel, General Law Division, U.S. Department of
Agriculture to Thomas H. Armstrong, Assistant General Counsel, U.S.
General Accounting Office, Apr.A 2, 2004.

   The Department, referring to the ordinary meaning of the terms in the
statute, said that *the terms credential, accreditation, and certification
mean they are required components for an individual to practice in his or
her profession.*  Id.  at 2.  The Department pointed out that Webster*s
New Collegiate Dictionary (1979) defines *credential* as *something that
gives a title to credit or confidence,* *accredit* as *to give official
authorization or approval to,* and *certification* as *the act of
certifying [to attest authoritatively].*  The Department stated that
*these definitions suggest that *professional credentials* would include
only those items that are official documentation of professional authority
.  .  .  . Membership in the California Society of Certified Public
Accountants does not bestow any sort of professional credential upon its
members.*  Id.

   We agree with the Department.  As the Department explained in its letter
to us, in order to interpret congressional intent regarding the meaning of
the statute, one begins by looking first to the language of the statute
itself.  Mallard v. United States District Court, 490 U.S. 296, 300--301
(1989).  The meaning of the statutory language is the ordinary, everyday
meaning rather than some obscure usage.  E.g., Mallard, 490 U.S. at 301;
38A Comp. Gen. 812 (1959).  The primary vehicle that Congress uses to
express its intent is the words it enacts into law.  See, e.g., Hartford
Underwriters Insurance Co. v. Union Planters Bank, N.A., 530 U.S. 1
(2000); Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., 519 U.S. 337 (1997).

   The plain meaning of the language in section 5757(a) suggests that
professional credentials would include only those items that are required
for an individual to be licensed or otherwise certified to practice a
particular profession.  It speaks in terms of accreditation, licenses, and
certification--terms ordinarily used and commonly understood to refer to
permission conferred on an individual by a regulatory body to engage in
the practice of a regulated profession.  Some types of documentation of
regulatory authorization that would demonstrate an employee*s
qualification to work in a specific professional area include annual state
bar membership, CPA licenses, medical licenses, court admission fees
required of attorneys for admission to practice before a court if
admission is necessary to carry out an agency*s statutory mission, teacher
certifications, and other certifications that permit an employee to
practice in a professional area.

   In our view, section 5757(a) also permits an agency to pay for certain
costs related to licensing which, although they are not licensing fees,
are required in order for the employee to obtain the license.  For
example, where attorneys licensed to practice law are required to be
members of state bar associations in order to maintain their license to
practice, agencies may pay the costs of those memberships.  In this
regard, we distinguish state bar membership, necessary to maintain a
license to practice, from membership in professional associations such as
the American Bar Association or the Federal Bar Association, which is not
a condition of a license.  Similarly, in this case, CalCPA membership is
not a prerequisite to obtain, or a requirement to maintain, a CPA license
in California.[4]  Section 5757(a), consequently, does not authorize the
Risk Management Agency to use appropriated funds to pay for CalCPA
membership.

   Reduced Costs of Training

   The Risk Management Agency employee requesting payment of her CalCPA
membership fee justifies agency reimbursement of the fee as a cost of
training;  she argues that membership in CalCPA is an economical way of
obtaining the mandatory continuing education that is required by the
California State Board of Accountancy.  Licensed CPAs in California are
required to take 40 hours of continuing education classes each year to
maintain their eligibility for the license.  The Education Foundation of
CalCPA offers courses, and the employee notes that the Foundation provides
discounts on course fees to CalCPA members.  The employee states that the
amount of the discounts would cover the annual dues for those members
taking 40A or more hours of training through the Foundation.[5]

   Section 5946 of title 5 of the United States Code, however, prohibits
agencies from paying for individual employee membership in a society or
association without specific statutory authority.  68A Comp. Gen. 606
(1989); 46 Comp. Gen. 135, 136--137 (1966).  The fact that there may be
some collateral benefit to the government from the employee*s membership
in an organization, such as the discounts here, is not sufficient to
overcome this prohibition against payment of membership fees.  See, e.g.,
53A Comp. Gen. 429 (1973); 52 Comp. Gen. 495 (1973); B-205768, Mar.A 2,
1982. 

   Agencies have authority pursuant to the Government Employees Training Act,
5A U.S.C. S 4109, to pay for employee training.  Nevertheless, agencies
generally do not have the authority to pay for membership fees unless *the
fee is a necessary cost directly related to the training itself or that
payment of the fee is a condition precedent to undergoing the training.*
    5A U.S.C. S 4109(b).  Here, membership in CalCPA is not a necessary cost
of the training nor a condition precedent to undergoing the training. 
Thus, section 4109 does not apply.

   Accordingly, the Risk Management Agency, pursuant to sectionA 4109, may
pay for the employee to participate in any training that CalCPA offers,
but not for the employee*s CalCPA membership fees.

   Agency Membership

   The Risk Management Agency employee requesting payment of the membership
fee argues that the agency has the authority to pay for the CalCPA
membership fee because the employee*s membership benefits the agency.[6] 
The employee states that her membership in CalCPA and her participation in
CalCPA-sponsored conferences will help the Department of Agriculture
maintain its credibility with the CPAs throughout California with whom
Department CPAs work on a regular basis. 

   Although section 5946 prohibits the Risk Management Agency from paying for
the employee*s membership, if the agency determines that the agency will
benefit from an agency, as opposed to an individual employee, membership
in the association, it may obtain a membership in the agency*s name.  See,
e.g., 52 Comp. Gen. 495 (1973) (Department of Justice may not pay an
employee*s membership fee in a professional organization even though
savings would accrue to the government from reduced subscription rates for
professional publications and the government would benefit from the
employee*s development as a result of the membership; Justice, however,
may become a member in its own name if membership is necessary in carrying
out authorized agency activities).  See also 53 Comp. Gen 429 (1973);
B-221569, June 2, 1986; B-205768, Mar. 2, 1982.  The agency must determine
that such membership is of primary benefit to the government and is
necessary to carry out its statutory function.  Id. 

   Accordingly, the Department of Agriculture, at its discretion, may pay for
an agency membership in CalCPA, in its own name or in the name of the Risk
Management Agency, if such membership is of primary benefit to the
government and the Department determines that such membership is necessary
to carry out its statutory function.

   CONCLUSION

   Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. S 5757(a), federal agencies are authorized to use
appropriated funds to pay the expenses of an employee to obtain
professional credentials, but an agency may only pay employee expenses
necessary to qualify for a particular profession.  Agency payment of fees
for voluntary memberships in organizations of already-credentialed
professionals is prohibited under 5 U.S.C. S 5946.  Accordingly,

   the Risk Management Agency does not have authority under section 5757 to
pay for an employee*s membership in a professional association if
membership is not a prerequisite for the employee to obtain qualification.

   Anthony H. Gamboa

   General Counsel

   ------------------------

   [1] We verified with the California State Board of Accountancy that
membership in CalCPA is not required to obtain a CPA license in
California.  Letter from Carol Sigmann, Executive Officer, California
Board of Accountancy, to Thomas H. Armstrong, Assistant General Counsel,
U.S. General Accounting Office, Mar.A 17, 2004 (Sigmann Letter). 

   [2] The Handbook is accessible at http://www.dca.ca.gov/cba/toc.htm (last
visited JulyA 29, 2004).

   [3] In Pub. L. No. 107-273, S 207(a), 116 Stat. 1757, 1779*1780 (Nov. 2,
2002), Congress enacted another section 5757 of title 5 of the United
States Code.  There are now two sections in the Code numbered 5757 which
are not related.

   [4] Sigmann Letter (see footnote 1 infra).

   [5] The Risk Management Agency employee*s statements were contained in an
e-mail she wrote to her Office Manager, which was forwarded to GAO on
MayA 25, 2004, for inclusion in the record.

   [6] See note 5.