Federal Travel Regulation; Clarifying Agency Responsibilities Concerning Reimbursement for Automatic Teller Machine (ATM) Fees and Laundry, Cleaning and Pressing of Clothing Expenses, 63134-63137 [2016-21993]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
63134
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: August 16, 2016.
Michael Goodis,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.960, the table is amended
by revising the following entry to read
as follows:
■
§ 180.960 Polymers; exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
PART 180—[AMENDED]
*
*
*
*
*
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Polymer
CAS No.
*
*
*
*
*
*
Acrylic polymers composed of one or more of the following monomers: Acrylic acid, butyl acrylate, butyl methacrylate,
carboxyethyl acrylate, ethyl acrylate, ethyl methacrylate, hydroxybutyl acrylate, hydroxybutyl methacrylate, hydroxyethyl acrylate, hydroxyethyl methacrylate, hydroxypropyl acrylate, hydroxypropyl methacrylate, isobutyl methacrylate, lauryl methacrylate,
methacrylic acid, methyl acrylate, lauryl acrylate, methyl methacrylate and stearyl methacrylate; with none and/or one or more
of the following monomers: Acrylamide, diethyl maleate, dioctyl maleate, maleic acid, maleic anhydride, monoethyl maleate,
monooctyl maleate, N-methyl acrylamide, N,N-dimethyl acrylamide, N-octylacrylamide, and acrylamidopropyl methyl sulfonic
acid; and their corresponding ammonium, isopropylamine, monoethanolamine, potassium, sodium triethylamine, and/or triethanolamine salts; the resulting polymer having a minimum number average molecular weight (in amu), 1,200.
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
41 CFR Part 102–74
Office of Government-wide
Policy (OGP), General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Issuance of bulletin; Correction.
AGENCY:
GSA published a document in
the Federal Register on August 18, 2016
at 81 FR 55148, regarding
Nondiscrimination Clarification in the
Federal Workplace. GSA is making an
editorial change to correct the incorrect
CFR part listed in the header.
DATES: Effective: September 14, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Dennis Oden, Director, Civil Rights
Programs Division (AKB), Office of Civil
Rights, 202–417–5711. Please cite
Notice–MA–2016–05; Correction.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
41 CFR Parts 301–11 and 301–70
A. Background
BILLING CODE 6820–14–P
Federal Management Regulation;
Nondiscrimination Clarification in the
Federal Workplace; Correction
Correction
In FR Doc. 2016–19450 published in
the Federal Register at 81 FR 55148,
August 18, 2016, make the following
correction:
On page 55148, in the first column,
third line of the header, remove ‘‘41
Jkt 238001
*
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
[FR Doc. 2016–22063 Filed 9–13–16; 8:45 am]
[Notice–MA–2016–05; Docket No. 2016–
0002; Sequence 19]
*
Applicability: Federal agencies have
until November 14, 2016 to apply this
rule to their internal policies.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
clarification of content, contact Mr. Cy
Greenidge, Program Analyst, Office of
Government-wide Policy, at 202–219–
2349. For more information pertaining
to status or publication schedules,
contact the Regulatory Secretariat
(MVCB), 1800 F Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20405, 202–501–4755.
Please cite FTR Case 2015–304.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: September 9, 2016.
Hada Flowers,
Federal Register Liaison, Division Director,
Regulatory Secretariat Division, Office of
Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office
of Acquisition Policy.
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
20:49 Sep 13, 2016
*
CFR part 74’’ and add ‘‘41 CFR part
102–74’’ in its place.
[FR Doc. 2016–20853 Filed 9–13–16; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
*
None.
[FTR Amendment 2016–02, FTR Case 2015–
304; Docket No. 2015–0017, Sequence No.
1]
RIN 3090–AJ56
Federal Travel Regulation; Clarifying
Agency Responsibilities Concerning
Reimbursement for Automatic Teller
Machine (ATM) Fees and Laundry,
Cleaning and Pressing of Clothing
Expenses
Office of Government-wide
Policy (OGP), General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
GSA is amending the Federal
Travel Regulation (FTR) by clarifying
the regulations regarding reimbursement
for Automatic Teller Machine (ATM)
fees and laundry, cleaning, and pressing
of clothing expenses.
DATES: Effective: September 14, 2016.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
GSA published a proposed rule in the
Federal Register on January 8, 2016 (81
FR 883). The rule proposed to amend
the FTR by expanding the definition of
‘‘incidental expenses’’ (IE) to include
ATM fees. Additionally, the rule
proposed to amend the FTR by
clarifying that agencies have discretion
regarding the reimbursement of
expenses related to laundry, cleaning,
and pressing of clothing for official
travel within CONUS that involves four
or more consecutive nights of lodging.
The public had 60 calendar days to
comment on the proposed rule. GSA
received 22 comments from 19
respondents. Two respondents opposed
the amendment in general, eleven
addressed only the inclusion of ATM
fees in the definition of IE, two
addressed only the clarification
concerning the final approval authority
for the reimbursement for laundry,
cleaning, and pressing of clothing
expenses, three addressed both the
E:\FR\FM\14SER1.SGM
14SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
proposed IE definition change and the
laundry reimbursement clarification
(which have been broken out separately
below for ease of response), and one was
out of scope. Some of these comments
resulted in changes to this final rule.
B. Analysis of Public Comments
The two comments that opposed the
amendment in general are summarized
below:
Comment: If travel is required to do
mission related duties, how can there be
a cap on the travel related expenses?
The employee should not have to pay
out of pocket to do their job.
Comment: As a government engineer,
I am already paid less than my private
industry counterparts and now it
appears that I am expected to pay my
own travel expenses as well.
Response: The final rule changes will
have a minimal impact on employee
reimbursements for official travel. When
necessary to fairly compensate travelers,
agencies will retain the discretion to
authorize the reimbursement for the cost
of ATM fees and/or the cost for laundry,
cleaning, and pressing of clothing
services while employees are on official
travel within CONUS for four or more
consecutive nights.
The fourteen comments concerning
ATM fees being included in the
definition of IE are summarized below:
Comment: Proposing to change ATM
fees to incidental expenses as part of per
diem is patently unfair to Federal
employees. You would be forcing
employees ordered to travel (many
times against the will or convenience of
employees) as part of their work duties
to subsidize the Federal government’s
operating costs especially considering
the expensive costs of eating at
restaurants in many cities.
Comment: An employee conducting
official business for the government
should not be required to use personal
funds to augment travel costs. We do
not have control over the fees charged
by the banks for using their ATMs and
we do not have control over fees for
‘‘cash advance’’ charged by the
government credit card issuer.
Comment: This is not a fair
assessment to move the expense of ATM
fees under the incidental expense
included in the M&IE. It would cause
the traveler to come out of pocket for
official business.
Comment: Moving ATM fees from
miscellaneous expenses to incidental
expenses means that employees of
official travel will have to use per diem
funds to pay for ATM fees instead of
those available for meals and lodging.
Comment: Employees on short trips
will receive insufficient incidental
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 Sep 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
expense reimbursement to reimburse
the employee for all ATM fees incurred,
thereby requiring the employee to pay
for the ATM fees out-of-pocket. The
proposal also gives agencies the
discretion to determine when an
employee will be separately reimbursed
for ATM fees even though the fees are
part of incidental expense allowance.
We believe this will result in a
disproportionate increase in
administrative time required to
determine when ATM fees are payable
as miscellaneous expenses when
compared to any cost savings realized
from the proposed regulatory change.
Comment: Moving the ATM fee from
a miscellaneous expense to an
incidental expense puts the burden of
government travel onto the traveler
which shouldn’t be allowed. There are
times when an employee might be on
travel for a week or more and the ATM
fee (with the foreign ATM fee and .025
fee of the total amount) would easily
exceed the $5 incidental expense
allowance. This goes against the precept
that it should not cost the employee to
conduct government business (travel).
Comment: The $5 limit for incidental
expenses will be inadequate to
reimburse the actually incurred
expenses of employees who use their
Citi Travel Cards to obtain cash
advances for their TDY. This proposed
rule change does not appear to account
for these reasonably anticipated costs it
will prohibit agencies from reimbursing,
to the detriment of employees on TDY.
Comment: My agency has put in place
restrictions on how much cash we are
able to get from ATMs, despite the fact
we are advised in many countries to
only use cash and not the credit card
due to fraud. In all cases we are assessed
an ATM fee in the foreign country and
again by the travel card. This proposed
regulation may mean I end up eating
some or all of these costs on my own.
Comment: I disagree with including
ATM services and fees as part of per
diem allowance. Our agency has a large
number of traveler’s that use the ATM
to get advanced funds.
Comment: Section 301–12.1 removes
ATM fee as a miscellaneous travel
expense and does not give agencies
discretion to pay ATM fees as a
miscellaneous expense. Section 300–
70.200(h) implies that an agency or
approving official can determine if the
ATM fees can be paid as a separate
miscellaneous expense, if warranted
(e.g., forced gratuity or other incidental
expenses, which may exhaust the
allowance to cover the cost of ATM
fees). Sections 301–12.1 and 300–70.200
are contradictory and need to be
revised.
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
63135
Comment: If GSA wishes to embed
the ATM fees inside the incidental
expenditures part of the traveler
reimbursement, then GSA should do a
nation-wide survey on incidental
expenses. If GSA is unwilling to update
the incidental expenses inside CONUS,
then the ATM fees should remain a
miscellaneous expense reimbursement,
fully reimbursable for federal
employees.
Comment: It is unfair to make them
pay these mandated fees which will
easily exceed the daily incidental rate.
Unlike the USA where taxi, bus, and
even the smallest restaurants accept
travel cards as payment, many
international locations require local
cash currency for valid travel related
expenses. It is unfair to expect
employees to pay for the required
currency transaction, exchange rate,
ATM surcharges and travel card cash
advance fees when this entire system
was put in place for government
convenience and to reduce government
costs by eliminating cashiers necessary
to dispense foreign travel currency.
Comment: It is not fair that
reimbursement for ATM fees for the use
of the government card will no longer be
a separate miscellaneous item, but will
be lumped in with the incidental
expenses. The incidental expenses are
those that we, as travelers may or may
not choose to make. We are required to
expend the ATM fees for the use of the
government card. This is because we are
required by Federal law to use the
government travel card (and ONLY the
government travel card) when obtaining
cash for travel.
Comment: The incidental fees for
baggage, porters, etc. are discretionary
based on the traveler’s decision. ATM
fees are not discretionary. A traveler is
entitled to a cash advance for MI&E
expenses which means incurring an
ATM fee.
Response: Based upon these
comments, GSA will neither add ATM
fees to the definition for ‘‘incidental
expenses,’’ nor amend FTR 301–70.200
regarding internal per diem policy, and
will continue to list ATM fees as a
miscellaneous expense. Agencies will
continue to have discretion regarding
the reimbursement of ATM fees. In
those instances when directly using the
Government contractor-issued travel
charge card may not be feasible, the
amendment to section 301–70.301
mandates agencies to establish policies
and procedures governing who will
determine if miscellaneous expense
reimbursement is appropriate in
connection with official travel, to
include transaction fees for use of
ATMs) when using the Government
E:\FR\FM\14SER1.SGM
14SER1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
63136
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
contractor-issued charge card. If there is
a valid reason why the traveler cannot
use the Government travel charge for
lodging and meals, agencies have the
option to fully reimburse travelers for
ATM fees. As a result, GSA has updated
the language in this final rule based
upon these comments.
The five comments that addressed
clarification of the policy relating to
laundry, cleaning, and pressing of
clothing expenses are summarized
below:
Comment: I have been involved with
DoD travel vouchers and claims for over
30 years and recommend not to
authorize laundry and dry cleaning as a
reimbursable expense. Leave it as an
incidental expense.
Comment: When TDY for more than
a week, laundry usually has to be
cleaned. While at the home station,
most employees own washers and
dryers to do their own laundry.
Cleaning laundry while TDY is an
added expense that would not otherwise
exist and therefore should be covered by
miscellaneous expenses and not
incidentals.
Comment: The change makes the
reimbursement for laundry, cleaning
and pressing of clothing at the
discretion of the agency. This will
permit the agency to disallow these
expenses entirely.
Comment: We recommend that GSA
completely eliminate the reimbursement
of laundry, dry cleaning, and pressing of
clothing, as these expenses are not a
direct consequence of traveling.
Employees would incur the same
expenses for laundry, dry cleaning, and
pressing of clothing at their official duty
station if they were not in travel status.
Comment: 301–11.31 needs to include
a minimum number of days or proof of
expense must be provided. We have no
way of proving if the expense actually
occurred, except for dry cleaning. If you
make this expense more lenient, we will
have traveler’s claiming laundry for a
single overnight stay.
Response: The cost of laundry,
cleaning, and pressing of clothing
services will continue to be treated as a
discretionary, miscellaneous expense.
The change in regulatory language is
intended to clarify that agencies are
responsible for making the final
decision with respect to approving this
type of expense. Although the FTR
stipulates that a TDY trip must be at
least four consecutive nights for the
traveler to be eligible for reimbursement
of laundry and dry cleaning expenses,
agencies have the discretion to establish
a higher number of minimum nights.
Additionally, agencies may choose to
deny reimbursement for any laundry,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 Sep 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
dry cleaning, and clothes pressing
expenses. The agency’s internal policies
should address what the agency will
require for the traveler to receive
approval for reimbursement for these
expenses. This, GSA will not change the
language in the amendment based upon
these comments.
The following comment was out of
scope as it does not pertain to the
subject matter of this amendment, and
as a result, no change will be made in
response:
Comment: With everyone having
computers, why is there a need for so
much travel? Video conferencing costs a
fraction of sending ten people to Los
Angeles for a convention.
C. Major Changes in This Final Rule
Based upon the comments received,
this final rule does not include ATM
fees within the definition of ‘‘incidental
expenses,’’ but rather leaves
reimbursement of these expenses as a
miscellaneous expense, and further
clarifies that reimbursement for these
fees is within the agency’s discretion.
D. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and
13563 direct agencies to assess all costs
and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives, and if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. GSA has determined that this
final rule is not a significant regulatory
action is not subject to review under
section 6(b) of Executive Order 12866.
GSA has further determined that this
final rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
This final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
within the meaning of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. This
final rule is also exempt from the
Administrative Procedure Act pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) because it applies
to agency management or personnel.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does
not apply because the changes to the
FTR do not impose recordkeeping or
information collection requirements, or
the collection of information from
offerors, contractors, or members of the
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
public that require the approval of the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
G. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
This final rule is also exempt from
Congressional review prescribed under
5 U.S.C. 801. This final rule is not a
major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.
List of Subjects in 41 CFR Parts 301–11
and 301–70
Government employees, Travel and
transportation expenses; Administrative
practice and procedures, and
Individuals with disabilities.
Dated: August 3, 2016.
Denise Turner Roth,
Administrator of General Services.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5701–
5711, GSA amends 41 CFR parts 301–
11 and 301–70 as set forth below:
PART 301–11—PER DIEM EXPENSES
1. The authority citation for 41 CFR
part 301–11 continues to read as
follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5707.
2. Revise § 301–11.31 to read as
follows:
■
§ 301–11.31 Are laundry, cleaning and
pressing of clothing expenses
reimbursable?
Your agency may reimburse the
expenses incurred for laundry, cleaning,
and pressing of clothing as a
miscellaneous travel expense for TDY
within CONUS. However, you must
incur a minimum of four consecutive
nights lodging on official travel to
qualify for this reimbursement. Laundry
and dry cleaning expenses have not
been removed from foreign per diem
rates established by the Department of
State, or from non-foreign area per diem
rates established by the Department of
Defense. Separate claims for laundry
and dry cleaning expenses incurred in
foreign areas and non-foreign areas are
not allowed.
PART 301–70—INTERNAL POLICY
AND PROCEDURE REQUIREMENTS
3. The authority citation for 41 CFR
part 301–70 continues to read as
follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5707; 40 U.S.C. 121(c);
Sec. 2, Pub. L. 105–264, 112 Stat. 2350 (5
U.S.C. 5701, note), OMB Circular No. A–126,
revised May 22, 1992, and OMB Circular No.
A–123, Appendix B, revised January 15,
2009.
4. Amend § 301–70.301 by revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\14SER1.SGM
14SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
§ 301–70.301 What governing policies
must we establish for payment of
miscellaneous expenses?
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Who will determine if other
miscellaneous expenses are appropriate
for reimbursement in connection with
official travel, including but not limited
to, fees for the use of automated teller
machine (ATMs) when using the
Government contractor-issued travel
charge card and expenses for laundry,
cleaning, and pressing of clothing.
[FR Doc. 2016–21993 Filed 9–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–14–P
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Parts 301–51 and 301–70
[FTR Amendment 2016–01; FTR Case 2015–
303; Docket No. 2016–0005, Sequence
No. 1]
RIN 3090–AJ68
Federal Travel Regulation; Optimal Use
of the Government Contractor Issued
Travel Charge Card
Office of Government-wide
Policy (OGP), General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
GSA is amending the Federal
Travel Regulation (FTR) by updating the
exemptions from mandatory use of the
Government contractor-issued travel
charge card to ensure the card is used
as often as practicable.
DATES:
Effective: September 14, 2016.
Applicability: Federal agencies have
until November 14, 2016 to apply this
rule to their internal policies.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
clarification of content, contact Mr. Cy
Greenidge, Program Analyst, Office of
Government-wide Policy, at 202–219–
2349. For more information pertaining
to status or publication schedules,
contact the Regulatory Secretariat
(MVCB), 1800 F Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20405, 202–501–4755.
Please cite FTR Case 2015–303.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
A. Background
GSA published a proposed rule in the
Federal Register on January 29, 2016
(81 FR 5007). That rule proposed
amending the FTR to emphasize the
need for agencies to maximize
Government contractor-issued travel
charge card rebates by increasing the
use of the card. Additionally, this rule
proposed updating the classes of official
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 Sep 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
travel expenses and employees that are
exempt from mandatory use of the
Government contractor-issued travel
charge card, with the goal of increasing
the issuance and appropriate use of the
cards by employees on official travel.
The public had 60 calendar days to
comment on the proposed rule. GSA
received six comments. Four comments
applied to the proposed rule; however,
one did not fall under the purview of
this office, and the other was out-ofscope based upon the subject matter of
the final rule. As a result of the
applicable comments, GSA made
changes to the rule, although these
changes are not considered to be
significant.
B. Analysis of Public Comments
Comment: Proposed paragraph 301–
70.700(d) should be revised. It should
begin with ‘‘If it is not in the interest of
the Government to do so . . .’’
Response: Upon reflection, GSA
determined the proposed amendment to
§ 301–70.700 to be unnecessary, and
therefore, it has been removed.
Comment: Federal agencies cannot
verify/enforce that their travelers charge
all official travel expenses to the
Government travel charge card. As a
result of this change in practice,
verifying the charge card method of
payment has become a more labor
intensive/expensive process thus
nullifying the benefits derived from
generating additional travel charge card
rebates.
Response: The purpose of this
amendment is to increase the use of the
Government contractor-issued travel
charge card by limiting the number of
exemptions, as opposed to verifying or
enforcing that travelers actually use
these cards. Section 301–70.700 already
requires that employees, unless
exempted, use the Government
contractor-issued travel charge card for
official travel expenses. Agencies
should already have an established
verification process in place. Thus, GSA
will not change the language in the
amendment based upon this comment.
Comment: I agree with the changes to
§ 301–51.2 because it requires more
travelers to have and use the
Government contractor-issued travel
charge card. While §§ 301–70.700, 301–
70.701, and 301–70.704 gives the agency
a way to exempt employees with poor
credit or high delinquency rates.
Response: Respondent is in agreement
with the final rule. While GSA removed
the proposed amendments to §§ 301–
70.700 and 301–70.701 as unnecessary,
agencies retain the authority to exempt
any payment, person, type or class of
payments, or type or class of agency
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
63137
personnel if the exemption is
determined to be necessary in the
interest of the agency.
Comment: In the FTR proposal, it is
written: If an employee is deemed
eligible for a Government contractorissued travel charge card and is
expected to travel, the card must be
issued and activated within 60 days of
the travel charge card eligibility date, as
determined by the agency. The proposal
does not state any actions to take if the
account is not activated within 60 days.
Will GSA be writing something in the
FTR that will further clarify what
actions should be taken if the
cardholder does not activate the account
within 60 days?
Response: Employees are required to
activate the Government contractorissued travel charge card when received.
Agencies should develop internal policy
addressing what actions to take if an
employee fails to activate the card
within 60 days of receipt. GSA has
updated sections §§ 301–51.1 and 301–
70.708 to address this comment.
Comment: Travel cards for official use
can be better managed if bills go to a
central office for approval and payment.
This will also eliminate the massive
misuse of the cards. Additionally, it will
take the card holder out of the loop for
late fees and potential impact on their
credit scores.
Response: This comment is outside
the scope of this rule, and as such, no
change will be made to the language of
the amendment based upon this
comment.
Comment: Section 301–12.1 removes
ATM fee as a miscellaneous travel
expense and does not give agencies
discretion to pay ATM fees as a
miscellaneous expense. Section 300–
70.200(h) implies that an agency or
approving official can determine if the
ATM fees can be paid as a separate
miscellaneous expense, if warranted
(e.g., forced gratuity or other incidental
expenses, which may exhaust the
allowance to cover the cost of ATM
fees). Sections 301–12.1 and 300–70.200
are contradictory and need to be
revised.
Response: This comment is outside
the scope of this rule, and as such, no
change will be made to the language of
the amendment based upon this
comment.
C. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and
13563 direct agencies to assess all costs
and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives, and if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
E:\FR\FM\14SER1.SGM
14SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 14, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63134-63137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-21993]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Parts 301-11 and 301-70
[FTR Amendment 2016-02, FTR Case 2015-304; Docket No. 2015-0017,
Sequence No. 1]
RIN 3090-AJ56
Federal Travel Regulation; Clarifying Agency Responsibilities
Concerning Reimbursement for Automatic Teller Machine (ATM) Fees and
Laundry, Cleaning and Pressing of Clothing Expenses
AGENCY: Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: GSA is amending the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) by
clarifying the regulations regarding reimbursement for Automatic Teller
Machine (ATM) fees and laundry, cleaning, and pressing of clothing
expenses.
DATES: Effective: September 14, 2016.
Applicability: Federal agencies have until November 14, 2016 to
apply this rule to their internal policies.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For clarification of content, contact
Mr. Cy Greenidge, Program Analyst, Office of Government-wide Policy, at
202-219-2349. For more information pertaining to status or publication
schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat (MVCB), 1800 F Street
NW., Washington, DC 20405, 202-501-4755. Please cite FTR Case 2015-304.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
GSA published a proposed rule in the Federal Register on January 8,
2016 (81 FR 883). The rule proposed to amend the FTR by expanding the
definition of ``incidental expenses'' (IE) to include ATM fees.
Additionally, the rule proposed to amend the FTR by clarifying that
agencies have discretion regarding the reimbursement of expenses
related to laundry, cleaning, and pressing of clothing for official
travel within CONUS that involves four or more consecutive nights of
lodging.
The public had 60 calendar days to comment on the proposed rule.
GSA received 22 comments from 19 respondents. Two respondents opposed
the amendment in general, eleven addressed only the inclusion of ATM
fees in the definition of IE, two addressed only the clarification
concerning the final approval authority for the reimbursement for
laundry, cleaning, and pressing of clothing expenses, three addressed
both the
[[Page 63135]]
proposed IE definition change and the laundry reimbursement
clarification (which have been broken out separately below for ease of
response), and one was out of scope. Some of these comments resulted in
changes to this final rule.
B. Analysis of Public Comments
The two comments that opposed the amendment in general are
summarized below:
Comment: If travel is required to do mission related duties, how
can there be a cap on the travel related expenses? The employee should
not have to pay out of pocket to do their job.
Comment: As a government engineer, I am already paid less than my
private industry counterparts and now it appears that I am expected to
pay my own travel expenses as well.
Response: The final rule changes will have a minimal impact on
employee reimbursements for official travel. When necessary to fairly
compensate travelers, agencies will retain the discretion to authorize
the reimbursement for the cost of ATM fees and/or the cost for laundry,
cleaning, and pressing of clothing services while employees are on
official travel within CONUS for four or more consecutive nights.
The fourteen comments concerning ATM fees being included in the
definition of IE are summarized below:
Comment: Proposing to change ATM fees to incidental expenses as
part of per diem is patently unfair to Federal employees. You would be
forcing employees ordered to travel (many times against the will or
convenience of employees) as part of their work duties to subsidize the
Federal government's operating costs especially considering the
expensive costs of eating at restaurants in many cities.
Comment: An employee conducting official business for the
government should not be required to use personal funds to augment
travel costs. We do not have control over the fees charged by the banks
for using their ATMs and we do not have control over fees for ``cash
advance'' charged by the government credit card issuer.
Comment: This is not a fair assessment to move the expense of ATM
fees under the incidental expense included in the M&IE. It would cause
the traveler to come out of pocket for official business.
Comment: Moving ATM fees from miscellaneous expenses to incidental
expenses means that employees of official travel will have to use per
diem funds to pay for ATM fees instead of those available for meals and
lodging.
Comment: Employees on short trips will receive insufficient
incidental expense reimbursement to reimburse the employee for all ATM
fees incurred, thereby requiring the employee to pay for the ATM fees
out-of-pocket. The proposal also gives agencies the discretion to
determine when an employee will be separately reimbursed for ATM fees
even though the fees are part of incidental expense allowance. We
believe this will result in a disproportionate increase in
administrative time required to determine when ATM fees are payable as
miscellaneous expenses when compared to any cost savings realized from
the proposed regulatory change.
Comment: Moving the ATM fee from a miscellaneous expense to an
incidental expense puts the burden of government travel onto the
traveler which shouldn't be allowed. There are times when an employee
might be on travel for a week or more and the ATM fee (with the foreign
ATM fee and .025 fee of the total amount) would easily exceed the $5
incidental expense allowance. This goes against the precept that it
should not cost the employee to conduct government business (travel).
Comment: The $5 limit for incidental expenses will be inadequate to
reimburse the actually incurred expenses of employees who use their
Citi Travel Cards to obtain cash advances for their TDY. This proposed
rule change does not appear to account for these reasonably anticipated
costs it will prohibit agencies from reimbursing, to the detriment of
employees on TDY.
Comment: My agency has put in place restrictions on how much cash
we are able to get from ATMs, despite the fact we are advised in many
countries to only use cash and not the credit card due to fraud. In all
cases we are assessed an ATM fee in the foreign country and again by
the travel card. This proposed regulation may mean I end up eating some
or all of these costs on my own.
Comment: I disagree with including ATM services and fees as part of
per diem allowance. Our agency has a large number of traveler's that
use the ATM to get advanced funds.
Comment: Section 301-12.1 removes ATM fee as a miscellaneous travel
expense and does not give agencies discretion to pay ATM fees as a
miscellaneous expense. Section 300-70.200(h) implies that an agency or
approving official can determine if the ATM fees can be paid as a
separate miscellaneous expense, if warranted (e.g., forced gratuity or
other incidental expenses, which may exhaust the allowance to cover the
cost of ATM fees). Sections 301-12.1 and 300-70.200 are contradictory
and need to be revised.
Comment: If GSA wishes to embed the ATM fees inside the incidental
expenditures part of the traveler reimbursement, then GSA should do a
nation-wide survey on incidental expenses. If GSA is unwilling to
update the incidental expenses inside CONUS, then the ATM fees should
remain a miscellaneous expense reimbursement, fully reimbursable for
federal employees.
Comment: It is unfair to make them pay these mandated fees which
will easily exceed the daily incidental rate. Unlike the USA where
taxi, bus, and even the smallest restaurants accept travel cards as
payment, many international locations require local cash currency for
valid travel related expenses. It is unfair to expect employees to pay
for the required currency transaction, exchange rate, ATM surcharges
and travel card cash advance fees when this entire system was put in
place for government convenience and to reduce government costs by
eliminating cashiers necessary to dispense foreign travel currency.
Comment: It is not fair that reimbursement for ATM fees for the use
of the government card will no longer be a separate miscellaneous item,
but will be lumped in with the incidental expenses. The incidental
expenses are those that we, as travelers may or may not choose to make.
We are required to expend the ATM fees for the use of the government
card. This is because we are required by Federal law to use the
government travel card (and ONLY the government travel card) when
obtaining cash for travel.
Comment: The incidental fees for baggage, porters, etc. are
discretionary based on the traveler's decision. ATM fees are not
discretionary. A traveler is entitled to a cash advance for MI&E
expenses which means incurring an ATM fee.
Response: Based upon these comments, GSA will neither add ATM fees
to the definition for ``incidental expenses,'' nor amend FTR 301-70.200
regarding internal per diem policy, and will continue to list ATM fees
as a miscellaneous expense. Agencies will continue to have discretion
regarding the reimbursement of ATM fees. In those instances when
directly using the Government contractor-issued travel charge card may
not be feasible, the amendment to section 301-70.301 mandates agencies
to establish policies and procedures governing who will determine if
miscellaneous expense reimbursement is appropriate in connection with
official travel, to include transaction fees for use of ATMs) when
using the Government
[[Page 63136]]
contractor-issued charge card. If there is a valid reason why the
traveler cannot use the Government travel charge for lodging and meals,
agencies have the option to fully reimburse travelers for ATM fees. As
a result, GSA has updated the language in this final rule based upon
these comments.
The five comments that addressed clarification of the policy
relating to laundry, cleaning, and pressing of clothing expenses are
summarized below:
Comment: I have been involved with DoD travel vouchers and claims
for over 30 years and recommend not to authorize laundry and dry
cleaning as a reimbursable expense. Leave it as an incidental expense.
Comment: When TDY for more than a week, laundry usually has to be
cleaned. While at the home station, most employees own washers and
dryers to do their own laundry. Cleaning laundry while TDY is an added
expense that would not otherwise exist and therefore should be covered
by miscellaneous expenses and not incidentals.
Comment: The change makes the reimbursement for laundry, cleaning
and pressing of clothing at the discretion of the agency. This will
permit the agency to disallow these expenses entirely.
Comment: We recommend that GSA completely eliminate the
reimbursement of laundry, dry cleaning, and pressing of clothing, as
these expenses are not a direct consequence of traveling. Employees
would incur the same expenses for laundry, dry cleaning, and pressing
of clothing at their official duty station if they were not in travel
status.
Comment: 301-11.31 needs to include a minimum number of days or
proof of expense must be provided. We have no way of proving if the
expense actually occurred, except for dry cleaning. If you make this
expense more lenient, we will have traveler's claiming laundry for a
single overnight stay.
Response: The cost of laundry, cleaning, and pressing of clothing
services will continue to be treated as a discretionary, miscellaneous
expense. The change in regulatory language is intended to clarify that
agencies are responsible for making the final decision with respect to
approving this type of expense. Although the FTR stipulates that a TDY
trip must be at least four consecutive nights for the traveler to be
eligible for reimbursement of laundry and dry cleaning expenses,
agencies have the discretion to establish a higher number of minimum
nights. Additionally, agencies may choose to deny reimbursement for any
laundry, dry cleaning, and clothes pressing expenses. The agency's
internal policies should address what the agency will require for the
traveler to receive approval for reimbursement for these expenses.
This, GSA will not change the language in the amendment based upon
these comments.
The following comment was out of scope as it does not pertain to
the subject matter of this amendment, and as a result, no change will
be made in response:
Comment: With everyone having computers, why is there a need for so
much travel? Video conferencing costs a fraction of sending ten people
to Los Angeles for a convention.
C. Major Changes in This Final Rule
Based upon the comments received, this final rule does not include
ATM fees within the definition of ``incidental expenses,'' but rather
leaves reimbursement of these expenses as a miscellaneous expense, and
further clarifies that reimbursement for these fees is within the
agency's discretion.
D. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess
all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives, and if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O.
13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits,
of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.
GSA has determined that this final rule is not a significant regulatory
action is not subject to review under section 6(b) of Executive Order
12866. GSA has further determined that this final rule is not a major
rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
This final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. This final rule is
also exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
553(a)(2) because it applies to agency management or personnel.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply because the changes to
the FTR do not impose recordkeeping or information collection
requirements, or the collection of information from offerors,
contractors, or members of the public that require the approval of the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
G. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This final rule is also exempt from Congressional review prescribed
under 5 U.S.C. 801. This final rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C.
804.
List of Subjects in 41 CFR Parts 301-11 and 301-70
Government employees, Travel and transportation expenses;
Administrative practice and procedures, and Individuals with
disabilities.
Dated: August 3, 2016.
Denise Turner Roth,
Administrator of General Services.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
5701-5711, GSA amends 41 CFR parts 301-11 and 301-70 as set forth
below:
PART 301-11--PER DIEM EXPENSES
0
1. The authority citation for 41 CFR part 301-11 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5707.
0
2. Revise Sec. 301-11.31 to read as follows:
Sec. 301-11.31 Are laundry, cleaning and pressing of clothing
expenses reimbursable?
Your agency may reimburse the expenses incurred for laundry,
cleaning, and pressing of clothing as a miscellaneous travel expense
for TDY within CONUS. However, you must incur a minimum of four
consecutive nights lodging on official travel to qualify for this
reimbursement. Laundry and dry cleaning expenses have not been removed
from foreign per diem rates established by the Department of State, or
from non-foreign area per diem rates established by the Department of
Defense. Separate claims for laundry and dry cleaning expenses incurred
in foreign areas and non-foreign areas are not allowed.
PART 301-70--INTERNAL POLICY AND PROCEDURE REQUIREMENTS
0
3. The authority citation for 41 CFR part 301-70 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5707; 40 U.S.C. 121(c); Sec. 2, Pub. L. 105-
264, 112 Stat. 2350 (5 U.S.C. 5701, note), OMB Circular No. A-126,
revised May 22, 1992, and OMB Circular No. A-123, Appendix B,
revised January 15, 2009.
0
4. Amend Sec. 301-70.301 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
[[Page 63137]]
Sec. 301-70.301 What governing policies must we establish for payment
of miscellaneous expenses?
* * * * *
(c) Who will determine if other miscellaneous expenses are
appropriate for reimbursement in connection with official travel,
including but not limited to, fees for the use of automated teller
machine (ATMs) when using the Government contractor-issued travel
charge card and expenses for laundry, cleaning, and pressing of
clothing.
[FR Doc. 2016-21993 Filed 9-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-14-P
