TITLE:  State Department - Rest and Recuperation Travel, B-302728, October 1, 2004
BNUMBER:  B-302728
DATE:  October 1, 2004
**********************************************************************
   Decision

   Matter of:   State Department - Rest and Recuperation Travel

   File:            B-302728

   Date:           October 1, 2004

   DIGEST

   A State Department certifying officer located in the United States
Embassy, Kiev, Ukraine, may certify payment of a Foreign Service
employee's travel expenses to attend the funeral of a close family member,
based on the department's authority to grant "rest and recuperation"
travel under the Foreign Service Act of 1980, Pub. L. No. 96-465, codified
in 22 U.S.C. ch. 52.

   DECISION

   A State Department certifying officer for the United States Embassy in
Kiev, Ukraine, Ms. Joyce E. Coates, requests an advance decision under
31A U.S.C. SA 3529 regarding the use of State Department funds for
employee rest and recuperation (R&R) travel.  The certifying officer
questions whether it is proper to certify payment of appropriated funds
for R&R travel of an employee of the Embassy in Kiev, Ms.A Oluwatoyn
Martschenko, in order to attend the funeral of her mother-in-law.  As
explained below, we find that the certifying officer should certify the
employee's R&R travel expenses for payment.

   [2]  In January 2004, the Embassy asked the certifying officer to certify
payment of those R&R travel expenses to a private vendor for the
employee's travel expenses, but the certifying officer has not yet done
so. 

   In her request to this Office, the certifying officer questions whether
she should certify payment in this matter.  She notes that "the *purpose'
of R&R is to grant employees and family members at designated hardship
posts opportunity for relief from the harsh conditions imposed upon them. 
. . .  Going to a funeral would not seem to meet the purpose of rest and
recuperation."  Letter from Joyce E. Coates to Thomas H. Armstrong,
Assistant General Counsel for Appropriations Law, GAO, Feb.A 24, 2004
(received in GAO, Mar. 15, 2004).  Moreover, the certifying officer is
concerned that allowing the employee to use R&R travel to attend a family
funeral would "circumvent" State Department policy and rules governing EVT
in order to serve the "personal convenience" of the employee.  Id. 

   In April 2004, we asked the State Department's Legal Adviser to provide us
with his views on this matter.  Letter from Thomas H. Armstrong, Assistant
General Counsel for Appropriations Law, GAO, to William H. Taft, IV, State
Department Legal Adviser, Apr.A 28, 2004.  In July 2004, the Office of the
Legal Adviser responded saying, among other things, that it is neither a
requirement nor a practice of the department to evaluate the
appropriateness of the personal activities of an employee or (eligible
family members) while on R&R travel.  Letter from Jamison Borek, Assistant
Legal Adviser for Legislation and Management, State Department, to Thomas
H. Armstrong, Assistant General Counsel for Appropriations Law, GAO, July
20, 2004.  In fact, the department has never before deemed an employee's
or family member's proposed R&R travel inappropriate based on the
department's assessment of the personal activities proposed or actually
pursued during the R&R trip.  Id.  The Assistant Legal Adviser said,
"Based on the facts of which we are aware, therefore, the Office of Legal
Adviser does not believe that [the employee] should be refused
reimbursement for R&R on the grounds that [her] attendance at her
mother-in-law's funeral on the R&R trip renders the trip inappropriate for
R&R."  Id. 

   DISCUSSION

   In order to determine whether State Department funds are legally available
to pay the employee's travel expenses, we need to understand the
department's authority with respect to R&R travel and EVT leave and the
expenses associated with them, as well as the policies and procedures
established by the department under that authority.  The State Department
derives its authority to grant leave and travel reimbursements to Foreign
Service employees and their families from the Foreign Service Act of 1980,
Pub. L. No. 96-465, 94 Stat. 2071 (Oct. 17, 1980), codified in 22A U.S.C.
ch. 52.  Section 901 of that act authorizes the department to pay for,
among other things, the R&R travel of members of the Foreign Service and
their families:

   "(6) rest and recuperation travel of member[s] of the [Foreign] Service
who are United States citizens, and members of their families, while
serving at locations abroad specifically designated by the Secretary for
purposes of this paragraph, to--

   "(A) other locations abroad having different social, climatic, or other
environmental conditions than those at the post at which the member of the
Service is serving, or

   "(B) locations in the United States;

   "except that, unless the Secretary otherwise specifies in extraordinary
circumstances, travel expenses under this paragraph shall be limited to
the cost for a member of the Service, and for each member of the family of
the member, of 1 round trip during any continuous 2-year tour unbroken by
home leave and of 2 round trips during any continuous 3-year tour unbroken
by home leave."

   Pub. L. No. 96-465, S 901, 94 Stat. at 2125, codified at 22 U.S.C. S
4081.[3]  Section 901 also provides for EVT:

   "(9) round-trip travel from a location abroad for purposes of family
visitation in emergency situations involving personal hardship."

   Pub. L. No. 96-465, S 901, 94 Stat. at 2126, codified at 22 U.S.C. S
4081.  Section 206 of the act provides that the department may "prescribe
such regulations as the Secretary deems appropriate to carry out functions
under this Act."  Pub.A L.A No.A 96a**465, S 206, 94 Stat. at 2079,
codified at 22 USC 3926(a).  To implement these provisions of the Foreign
Service Act, the department issued the Foreign Affairs Manual (F.A.M.) and
the Foreign Affairs Handbook (F.A.H.).[4]  Under the Foreign Affairs
Manual and Handbook, Foreign Service employees assigned to certain foreign
posts, such as Kiev, for three-year periods, are permitted to take two R&R
trips during the assignment, "provided that the purpose of rest and
recuperation travel is met."  3 F.A.H.-1 SA H-3726.3.a (T.L. No. POH-081,
Feb 26, 2002).  There is no guidance given with regard to what would be
deemed restful and recuperative travel.  EVT is authorized for certain
specific circumstances, e.g., death of a close relative, as is the case
here.  3A F.A.M. SSA 3743, 3744(1) -- (3) (T.L. No.A PERa**395, Feb. 28,
2001).  Generally, for both R&R travel and EVT, an employee must seek
approval in advance.  3 F.A.H.-1 ch.A H-3726 (T.L. No. POH-081, Feb. 26,
2002); 3A F.A.M. SA 3746.2a**1 (T.L. No. PER-395, Feb.A 28, 2001). 

   The legislative history for the R&R travel provision (paragraph 6 quoted
above) directs the department to implement the provision in a way that
appropriately "benefits . . . employee morale."  H.R. Conf. Rep. No.
95-1535, at 51 (1978).  The legislative history of the EVT provision
(paragraph 9 quoted above) indicates that EVT is intended to mitigate the
"personal hardship" which is incurred when great distance separates
families as a result of assignments in the Foreign Service.  S. Rep.
No.A 96-913, at 76 (1980).  While generally all members of a family who
reside at the employee's post of assignment may be approved for R&R
travel, ordinarily only one member of a family is authorized EVT.

   Under the facts presented here, the employee, as required by the
department's regulations, sought and obtained permission for R&R travel. 
The certifying officer is concerned that allowing the employee to use R&R
travel to cover the expenses of attending a funeral is not consistent with
the purposes of R&R travel and circumvents the department's regulations on
EVT.  As noted above, neither the statutes nor the regulations delineate
the allowable uses of R&R travel.  Here, the employee applied to use it to
attend a family funeral, and the employee's supervisor approved it.  The
legislative history of the R&R travel provision shows that Congress
intended to provide Foreign Service personnel and their families with
relief from the isolation and separation from family that necessarily
arises from being stationed at overseas posts.  Ba**214549, Oct. 5, 1984,
citing  S. Rep. No. 96-913, at 76 (1980). 

   What is important here is that, in accordance with the statute and the
department's regulations, responsible officials within the Kiev Embassy
approved the use of R&R travel for the employee in advance, with full
knowledge of the circumstances.  Furthermore, upon review within the
department, that approval has not been countermanded.  Letter from Jamison
Borek, Assistant Legal Adviser for Legislation and Management, State
Department, to Thomas H. Armstrong, Assistant General Counsel for
Appropriations Law, GAO, July 20, 2004.  Instead, the department has
advised that, within its discretion under the law, it does not regard it
necessary or appropriate to assess the purposes for which eligible
employees and family members take R&R travel.  Id.  This endorsement of
the Embassy staff's approval of R&R travel explicitly recognized that the
purpose of the travel was to attend the funeral of a close family
relative, notwithstanding the department's EVT regulations.  Id.  See
also, E-mail from  Anita A. Brown, Office of Employee Relations, Employee
Programs Division, State Department, to Jennifer Bonner, Management
Counselor, Kiev Embassy, Ukraine, Jan. 21, 2004 (the employee "is eligible
to receive the 2nd R&R. [While] R&R is not supposed to be meant for
bereavement travel . . . you are correct that employees (andA eligible
family members) use R&R for a variety of reasons and we should not be in
the business of policing what they do while on R&R.").  Although not all
would agree that attending a funeral provides "rest and recuperation," we
believe the purposes of R&R travel are broad enough to encompass this use,
if it is authorized by appropriate department officials acting under the
Foreign Affairs Manual and Handbook. 

   The certifying officer also raises a number of other concerns to question
whether this R&R travel voucher should be certified.  However, those
points need not be addressed in detail here as they do not alter our
conclusion.  Some of them relate to policy matters, which are for the
department to decide,[5] and others reflect policy decisions that the
Congress has already determined in the law.[6] 

   CONCLUSIONS

   The Foreign Service Act of 1980 entrusts the department with broad
discretion in the use of R&R funds.  The record indicates that the
employee sought and obtained administrative permission for R&R funded
travel in order to attend the funeral of her mother-in-law.  The
department has since re-examined and reaffirmed the original approval of
the employee's request.  There is no indication in the record that the
employee or the department failed to comply with any applicable statutory
or regulatory requirements.  The department's position is consistent with
the terms and purposes of the applicable statutes and regulations, and
there is no reason for us to question the department's interpretation or
application of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 in this regard. 
Consequently, the certifying officer should certify the payment of the
employee's R&R travel expenses.

   /SIGNED/

   Anthony H. Gamboa

   General Counsel

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

   [1] The State Department's Foreign Affairs Manual (F.A.M.) defines EVT as
"travel [of an eligible employee] at government expense to the United
States or other locations in certain situations of family emergency."  3
F.A.M. SA 3742 (T.L. No.A PER-395, Feb.A 28, 2001).

   [2] The Foreign Affairs Manual defines R&R travel as "the travel of U.S.
citizen employees of the Foreign Service and their families from their
assigned post to the United States, or to other locations abroad which
have different social, climatic, or environmental conditions than their
assigned post."  3 F.A.M. SA 3721 (T.L. No.A PERa**412, Aug. 17, 2001). 
See also 3 Foreign Affairs Handbook-1 SA Ha**3726.3.a (T.L. No.A POH-081,
Feb.A 26, 2002) (hereinafter, F.A.H.). 

   [3] The 1980 act consolidated, refined, and recodified the laws relating
to the Foreign Service.  S. Rep. No. 96-913, 1-3 (1980).  The language
quoted above in section 901(6)(B) of the 1980 act (authorizing R&R travel
to "locations in the United States") actually originated in section 407 of
the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1979.  Pub. L. No.
95-426, SA 407, 92 Stat. 963, 980 (Oct. 7, 1978).  

   [4] These volumes are statutory regulations, issued under the authority of
22 U.S.C. SA 4081(5)(B).  B-251231, n.2, Sept.A 2, 1993; Ba**212445, Nov.
17, 1986.  See also 3A F.A.M. SSA 1111.3, 1112, 1112.2 (T.L. No. PER-274,
July 6, 1995).

   [5] For example, the certifying officer is concerned that the employee may
have forfeited or exhausted her right to further R&R travel from the Kiev
Embassy posting*possibly when she failed to take R&R at a particular
time.  However, the department's regulations do not dictate when the
travel must be taken, only when it generally may not be taken, such as
within the first or last six months of the posting.  3A F.A.M. SA 3727
(T.L. No. PER-412, Aug. 17, 2001).  The certifying officer is also
concerned about the financial and budgetary implications of allowing R&R
travel to be used in circumstances where EVT might be used.  Under the
Foreign Affairs Manual, both R&R travel and EVT are funded primarily from
funds available to the post.  3 F.A.M. S 3726.3-2(a) (T.L. No. PER-415,
Aug. 29, 2001); 3A F.A.M. SA 3748.2.a(1) (T.L. No. PER-395, Feb. 28,
2001). It is the responsibility of the post administrative officials who
approve the use of R&R travel to use this authority wisely in order to
avoid creating financial and budgetary problems for the post as a
consequence of the R&R travel that they approve.

   [6] The certifying officer is concerned that allowing Foreign Service
employees who are authorized to take R&R travel to use it for
circumstances in which EVT might be used creates inequities vis-`a-vis
those Foreign Service employees who are not entitled to R&R travel
benefits.  The simple answer to this is that, in the law, Congress has
expressly provided an extra benefit to Foreign Service employees stationed
at hardship posts, and this use of that benefit falls within the broad
purposes of the statute, subject to the Department's exercise of the
discretion Congress granted it.  See Foreign Service Act of 1980, SSA 206,
901, Pub. L. No. 96-465, 94 Stat. 2071, 2079, 2125 (Oct. 17, 1980),
codified in 22 U.S.C. SSA 3926(a), 4081.