______________________

                              January 13, 1997
                          _______________________


                             GSBCA 13983-TRAV


                   In the matter of KATHLEEN M. WATKINS


     Kathleen M. Watkins, Ridgecrest, CA, claimant.

     Charles A. Hurst, Chief, Travel Policy Branch, Defense Finance
and Accounting Service, Columbus Center, Columbus, OH, appearing
for Department of Defense.

PARKER, Board Judge.

     Kathleen M. Watkins was issued temporary duty orders to travel
from China Lake, California to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,
Ohio.  The price of her airline ticket through Sato Travel, the
Government's contract travel agency, would have been $766.  Ms.
Watkins decided, for personal reasons, to take an indirect route
which would allow her to stop in Louisville, Kentucky on her way to
Wright-Patterson.  When Ms. Watkins spoke with Sato about her
plans, the agent told Ms. Watkins that it would be hard for Sato to
obtain a ticket for her at a reasonable price.  The agent suggested
that Ms. Watkins try elsewhere.  Ms. Watkins then purchased her
ticket through another travel agency.  She claimed reimbursement of
an amount which included the cost of her airline ticket, $209.

     The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) paid some of
the amount, but denied reimbursement of the cost of the airfare on
the grounds that the Joint Travel Regulations (JTR) prohibit
reimbursement for tickets purchased through a non-contract travel
agent unless the employee had "no alternative."  DFAS would like to
reimburse Ms. Watkins, and asks the Board whether an exception to
this rule exists for situations in which the employee was unaware
of the prohibition against the use of travel agents.

                                Discussion

     Such an exception does exist.  Section 301-3.4(b)(2)(ii) of
the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) provides that:

          The infrequent traveler, unaware of the
          general prohibition against the use of travel
          agents, who inadvertently purchases
          transportation with personal funds from a
          travel agent without the required advance
          administrative approval, may be granted an
          exception to the preclusive provision on a
          one-time basis and may be paid for the travel
          costs incurred not to exceed the cost which
          would have been properly chargeable to the
          Government if the transportation service had
          been purchased directly from the carrier.  In
          such cases, the traveler will be advised that 
          recurrence of such use of travel agents will
          result in denial of reimbursement unless it
          can be demonstrated that the traveler had no
          alternative.

41 CFR 301-3.4(b)(2)(ii) (1996).  The absence of a similar
provision in the JTR does not prevent DFAS from granting an
exception under this section of the FTR.  Because the FTR is issued
under delegation from the Congress, it is a "legislative rule" 
which has special weight.  The JTR, issued without statutory
imprimatur, merely explains and implements the FTR.  Thus, in cases
in which a provision of the JTR is in conflict with the FTR, we
will apply the FTR, except where a particular JTR provision
implements a statute which is specific to the Department of Defense
and, thus, is not reflected in the FTR.  C. Ray Taylor, GSBCA
13688-TRAV (Jan. 13, 1997).

                                 Decision

     The claim is GRANTED.




                                   __________________
                                   ROBERT W. PARKER
                                   Board Judge