______________________

                             September 8, 1997
                          ______________________


                             GSBCA 14213-TRAV


                       In the Matter of MARK SENDRA


     Mark Sendra, Wind Lake, WI, Claimant.

     Teresa Nelson, Acting B&E Program Manager, Zablocki VA Medical
Center, Milwaukee, WI, appearing for Department of Veterans
Affairs.

GOODMAN, Board Judge.

     Claimant, Mark Sendra, is an employee of the Department of
Veterans Affairs.  He seeks reimbursement of $105.35, the amount by
which his claim for mileage was reduced, because the agency
determined that it would have been more advantageous to the
Government for claimant to have used a Government-owned vehicle. 

     Mr. Sendra's assignment requires that he be in temporary duty
(TDY) travel status frequently.  His home office had issued a
limited open travel authorization for fiscal year 1997 which read,
in relevant part:

     During the fiscal year . . . Mr. Mark Sendra is hereby
     authorized under proper direction to perform official
     temporary duty travel and claim reimbursement in
     accordance with Federal Travel Regulations and VA
     Directives, without the necessity for obtaining further
     written authorization.

     Since 1995, Mr. Sendra had been reimbursed for use of his
privately-owned vehicle.  On April 2, 1997, while he was on TDY
travel through April 4, 1997, he received an e-mail from his
program manager which stated: "Request that you reserve a station
[Government-owned] vehicle for future trips because I will not be
able to approve mileage when use of the POC [privately-owned car]
is not advantageous for the Government."

     Upon submission of his travel voucher for travel
reimbursement, the program manager reduced the mileage allowance by
$105.35 for not using a Government-owned vehicle.  Mr. Sendra does
not contest the program manager's decision to require use of a
Government-owned vehicle for future travel, but contests what he
considers to be a retroactive revocation of his authorization to
use his own vehicle for the travel in question. 
     
     The Federal Travel Regulation, 41 CFR 301-4.4 (1996), reads,
in relevant part:

     [A]gencies should obtain commitments from employees who
     are expected to perform extensive automobile travel on
     official business whether they will use Government-
     furnished automobiles or whether they will elect to use
     privately owned conveyances.  Such commitments will be
     for periods of time which warrant the making of
     arrangements for supply of Government-furnished
     automobiles, and commitment changes shall be made in
     sufficient time in advance of their effective dates to
     permit arrangements to be made for acquisition or
     disposal of Government-furnished automobiles as required.

     Mr. Sendra's past TDY travel allowed for use of his privately-
owned vehicle without written authorization.  He had no reason to
believe that this authority had been revoked.  The program
manager's e-mail of April 2, 1997 concerning the use of Government-
furnished vehicles appeared to be applicable to future travel. 

     Under the circumstances, Mr. Sendra's past use of his own
vehicle was a commitment by him to use his own vehicle, and he had
no reason to expect that any commitment change would occur during
his travel between March 31 and April 4, 1997.  The commitment
change contained in the program manager's e-mail of April 2, 1997, 
was certainly not in sufficient time to allow the claimant to make
arrangements for use of a Government-furnished vehicle prior to
concluding travel on April 4, 1997.  Mr. Sendra was authorized to
use his own vehicle for the travel in question, and is entitled to
be reimbursed the mileage for such use, without reduction. 
Accordingly, we grant his claim in the amount of $105.35.




                                   __________________
                                   ALLAN H. GOODMAN
                                   Board Judge