________________________________________
                                    
                              June 2, 1997
                ________________________________________
                                    

GSBCA 13652-TRAV


In the Matter of ROBERT T. WOLAK


     Robert T. Wolak, Nazareth, PA, Claimant.

     Bobby A. Derrick, Acting Director, Finance and Accounting
Systems Transition, Indianapolis, IN, appearing for Department of
Defense.

BORWICK, Board Judge.

     Robert T. Wolak (claimant), a Department of the Army civilian
employee, filed a claim at the General Accounting Office
challenging the Department of the Army's determination that
claimant owed $34.50 (plus a $15 service charge for overpayment)
for alleged excess mileage travel.  The Army determined that
claimant drove too many miles, compared to the mileage shown by AR
55-60 (1982), the Official Tables of Distance (OTD) published by
the Department of the Army.  For the reasons that follow, we
conclude that the agency determination was correct.  

     Pursuant to the agency's authorization in June of 1994,
claimant traveled between his residence in Nazareth, Pennsylvania
and Vint Hill Farms, Virginia, in his privately owned vehicle
(POV).  After completion of his trip, he submitted a travel voucher
claiming 791 miles of travel, based on the mileage shown on his
odometer.  

     The Department of Defense Joint Civilian Personnel Travel
Regulations in effect at the time claimant traveled provided that
when transportation is by POV, distances will be as determined from
odometer readings.  Such distances will be used as a basis for
reimbursement "unless there is a substantial and unexplained
deviation from the [OTD.]"  Whenever the deviation exceeds three
percent of the distance shown in the OTD or ten miles, whichever is
the greater, an explanation will be required together with the
approval of the travel approving official.  JTR C4658.  
       
     The Army allowed reimbursement for mileage traveled presumably
as shown by the odometer reading for those segments of claimant's
trip where the OTD was silent.  Claimant does not challenge the
Army's determination of the miles traveled on these segments of his
trip.  The OTD, however, shows the distance for certain segments to
be 115 miles less (including the three percent variance allowance)
than the distance claimed for those segments.  At the time of
claimant's travel, the POV mileage rate was $.30 per mile; the Army
determined that claimant owed a refund of $34.50 from travel
payments, plus a $15 processing fee. 
 
      Claimant maintains that the Government is not entitled to the
refund because the OTD is in error.  He offers the mileage shown on
the  AAA Trip Planner  as proof.  For example, claimant maintains
the AAA Trip Planner mileage shows the distance between Tobyhanna,
Pennsylvaia and Warrenton, Virginia to be 285.8 miles, while the
OTD lists the distance as 266 miles.  

     While the official approving the travel approved the excess 
mileage, claimant did not explain the mileage discrepancy, except
to maintain the OTD was erroneous.  The GAO held that the question
of what routes are to be used in establishing the distances in the
OTD is a matter solely within the discretion of the agency, and the
GAO would not question the legality or correctness of the
administrative method used in establishing the highway distances. 
Ronald W. Hameline, B-130527 (Apr. 3, 1974).  We adopt this rule. 

     The agency is entitled to the refund.  Absent explanation,
such as inclement weather or unavoidable detours, Donald R. Ramsey,
B-162662 (Nov. 8, 1967), the agency does not abuse its discretion
by insisting that reimbursement be limited to the distance shown on
the OTD, plus allowable variance.  See James Jackson, GSBCA 13897-
TRAV (May 15, 1997)(applying similar provision in Federal Travel
Regulation); Constantine Bolaries, B-206646 (Apr. 3, 1984); James
H. Lewis, B-194254 (Jun. 18, 1979).
  
      Claimant does not challenge the $15 service charge and we do
not consider that matter here.  As to the mileage, claimant has
provided no explanation why we should accept his POV mileage as
against the OTD distances.  We note significant discrepancies
between the mileage claimant states he drove, and the mileage as
shown by the OTD.  In one instance, he seeks reimbursement for 320
alleged driving miles between Tobyhanna, Pennsylvania and Vint Hill
Farms, Virginia, when the OTD shows a distance of 266 miles between
those points, a difference of 54 miles.  The AAA Trip Planner
routing and mileage does not explain this discrepancy.  There is a
similar large, unexplained discrepancy for the return leg of his
trip from Vint Hill Farms, Virginia to Old Forge, Pennsylvania.  
                                   


                                   __________________________
                                   ANTHONY S. BORWICK
                                   Board Judge