. .
ORNEU ENERAL
July 28, 1958
Honorable Bill Allcorn Opinion No. WW-478
Commissioner
Qeneral Land Office Re: Questions concerning per
Austin 14, Texas diem and travel allowances
for employees of Qeneral
Land,Offlce - Sectlone 29,
30 and 31 of House Bill No.
133, Acts of the 55th Legls-
lature, Regular Session,
Dear Mr. Allcorn: 1957.
We have received your letter of April 29, in which
you request our opinion on two questions concerning travel
expense allowance for employees of the General Land Office,
which reads as follows:
"1 . Case Number One.
"John T. Halsey Is employed by this office
as a geophysical Inspector and his headquar-
ters are in Palaclos, Texas. Mr. Halsey was
assigned as a seismic Inspector In the Qulf
of Mexloo aboard a boat operated by the Shell
Oil Company and Instructed to report to that
company and board the boat In Aransas Pass,
Texas. In order to do so, he drove his car
from his headquarters In Palaclos, Texas, to
Aransas Pass, leaving the car parked at the
docks at Aransas'Pass while on duty in the
Qulf'of Mexico. The boat, at the close of
Its seven day working period, did not return
to Aranaas Pass, but Instead put In at the
nearest port which was Freeport, Texas, from
which work was to be conducted during the
next work period.
"On February 12, 1958, Mr. Halsey travel-
ed by bus from Freeport to Aransas Pass,
- .
Honorable Bill Allcorn, Page 2 (W-478).
picked up his car and drove back to Freeport,
again boarding the boat for work In the Gulf
of Mexico.
"In submitting his travel expenses, Mr.
Halsey Included his bus fare In the amount of
$4.50 and cab fare of 50$ from the bus sta-
tion In Aransas Pass to the docks. The State
Comptroller has refused to approve this ex-
pense account, the $8.00 per diem account for
February 12, as well as travel expenses for
the 1.58miles involved In moving the car from
Aransas Pass to the new docking location In
Freeport.
"While the amount of money here Involved Is compar-
atively small, your opinion as to whether or not
Mr. Halsey should be allowed his travel and per
diem expenses is needed since the procedure followed
by Mr. Halsey is quite often necessary for geophysi-
cal Inspectors.
"2. Case Number Two.
"J. M. Morgan is also employed by this
office as a geophysical Inspector and his head-
quarters are In Bay City, Texas.
"On March 1, 1958, Mr. Morgan was assigned
to seismic inspection work with the National
Geophysical Company In San Antonio Pay and the
port being used by the Company was Seadrift,
Texas. There were no accommodations In Sea-
drift, the nearest accommodations being in
Port Lavaca. Mr. Morgan could have stayed In
Port Lavaca at a cost to the State of $10.52
per day ($8.00 per diem allowance plus mile-
age) or he oould return to his headquarters
daily at a total cost to the State of $9.38
per day~for mileage.
"The particular section here Involved is a
rider In Section 31 prescribing In somewhat
ambiguous language that when it Is cheaper, a
- -
Honorable Bill Allcorn, Page 3 (W-478). ~'
traveling State employee may'return to his
headquarters dally. The rider goes further,
however, and provides that expenses on a
dally basis shall not exceed the per diem
allowance of $8.00. Under astrict lnterpre-
tatlon of this rider, I.e., a limitation of
$8.00, the employee, if'he did not want to
lose money, would have been forced to stay in
Port Lavaca at a greater cost to the State.
The question Is, then, whether the Leglsla-
ture Intended that Section 31 be given this
strict Interpretation and thus result In a
greater cost to the State.
"Here again, your official opinion as to wheth-
er or not Mr. Morgan should be allowed his expenses
Is needed because there are numerous,instances where
geophysical inspectors cannot find suitable lodging
in the port where the ship may be."
The General Land Office assigns seismic Inspectors
to private exploration boats manned by private crews and oper-
ated under company instructions In areas and upon schedules
of the company's option. The inspector has no control over
the operations, schedules, ports of departure or ports of
return, but merely accompanies the boat on its exploration,
and inspects and reports on the work done. When a seismic
inspector is assigned to a particular boat for a certain per-
iod of time, his duties may require him tc be in several ports
during the course of his Inspection.
Your supplemental request shows that Land Office
procedure requires the Inspector tc take certain records to
the port of departure in order to have them available for his
work. However, Land Office procedure prohibits the Inspector
from taking any records, maps, etc. with him on the boat,
except the actual dally report he is then completing. (This
is to avoid the possibility of losing the information already
compiled In the event of some disaster). It further seems
apparent that It would be impractical to rent an office or
hotel room In which to keep the records and maps, because the
Inspector usually stays out In the Gulf of Mexico for a period
of seven to ten days. You further stated, "These items . . .
- -
Honorable Bill Allcorn, Page 4 (W-478).
are left locked In the cars". Your supplemental request says,
In part:
"The working program of geophysical Inspectors
Is unpredictable because of weather and other con-
ditions and the inspector often finds It necessary
to make an overnight trip to move his car, his per-
sonal belongings, maps and other records to,,a
different location along the coast. . . .
Sections 29, 29(f), 30(a) and 31(b) of House Bill
133, Acts of the 55th Legislature, Regular Session, 1957, are
applicable in determining the propriety of making the travel
expense and per diem payments In question.
The expense account of Mr. Halsey shows that on the
12th day of February, 1958, he traveled from Freeport to Aran-
sas Pass to pick up his vehicle (left there when he was work-
ing out of Aransas Pass). Corresponding travel allowances are
claimed for bus travel to Aransas Pass, taxi fare in Aransas
Pass and mileage back to Freeport. The requirements of a
seismic inspector are somewhat peculiar in that neither the
Inspector, nor the State has any control over where his work
will take him, or, Indeed, where any one boat trip will take
him.
Since this assigned duty required him to leave his
designated headquarters, travel to and be In Aransas Pass to
work with the boat while there, and to have certain maps and
records with him which could not be taken out on the boat; and
also to travel to and be In Freeport to work with the boat
while there and have the maps and reaords with him there, as
well, we are of the opinion that the travel to Aransas Pass and
then to Freeport was necessarily incident to such assignment,
In those Instances where it was necessary to use his automobile
In which to safely keep such records. Whether it was necessary
to leave the car at the dock In which to store the records Is
a fact question, upon which this office cannot pass. We do
not conceive It to be the Intent of the Legislature to penalize
a State employee for performing his assigned duties in the only
manner possible or practical under the circumstances. We are
of the opinion that the travel allowance should be paid.
From the expense account, It is apparent that on
.
Honorable Bill Allcorn, Page 5 (W-478).
certain days the boat did not go out, eftherbecause of bad
weather or because the crew had a day off. During this time,
the Inspector stood by awaiting another trip. The fact that
he was not able to inspect was entirely beyond his control or
the control of the State. He Was required to be away from
his designated headquarters on an official assignment during
this time, and he, therefore, should receive his per diem
allowance. It may be true that such an employee could be
required to return to his designated headquarters during
these Idle periods, but this 1s an administrative decision,
and not for our consideration here.
!Theemployee In question arrived In Freeport on
February 9, 1958, and was required to stand by on the lOth,
11th and 12th of February. He left Freeport for another
Inspection on February 13th. In our opinion, the employee
would be entitled to per diem for the 12th,of'February, just
as he was on the 10th and llth, since his assignment was
incomplete, and he had not officially returned to his desig-
nated headquarters.
Insofar as Case Number Two Is concerned, Section
31(g) speclflcally provides that:
"Except that when it Is cheaper, a traveling
state employee may return to his headquarters
dally or on the weekend rather than stay out at
State's expense; cheaper--as It applies to dally
round trips shall be determined by computing the
mileage and per diem on a dally basis and the
entire mileage and per diem on any one dayTall
not exceed the per diem allowance of $8.00.
. . . (tiphasls added).
Under certain circumstances It might be advantage-
ous to the State to have the mployee return to his designated
headquarters, rather than seek lodging at or near his post of
duty. If the employee returns to his designated headquarters
each ni t, he may be compensated, but the provisions of Sec-
tion 31$"
g) make It clear that the maximum he may be paid Is
$8.00. The provisions of the Appropriation Bill are explicit
In this respect. We are of the opinion that, even though
particular Instances may arise wherein such provision forces
the employee to remain away from his designated headquarters,
Honorable Bill Allcorn, Page 6 (W-478).
thereby incurring expenses greater than if he came home each
night, this Is for the determination of the Legislature In
promulgating the rules and regulations under which State
employees are reimbursed their travel expenses, and we are
unable to write exceptions into the Appropriation Bill. The
Section to which you refer must be strictly aonstrued, and
the result Is as you point out in your request.
SUMMARY
The travel allowances and per diem claimed
by a selsmlc Inspector should be paid when
the travel was necessary to the perform-
ance of his assignment, even though it may
have been occasioned by circumstances be-
yond his control or control of the State;
when a State employee returns to his
designated headquarters daily or on the
week end, rather than stay out at State's
expense, the entire mileage and per diem
on any one day shall not exceed the per
diem allowance of $8.00.
Yours very truly,
WILL WILSON
Attorney General of Texas
By&&^""3~&
Tom I. McFarllng
TIM:jl Assistant
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
L. P. Lollar, Chairman
Wayland C. Rivers, Jr.
Jot Hodges, Jr.
Riley Eugene Fletcher
J. W. Wheeler
REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY:
W. V. Geppert