So, what does happen when two or more airlines decide to consolidate or agree to a merger?  The consolidation/merger will go through several steps that will ultimately lead to one operation.  Below is a brief summary of some of the steps they will need to partake in:

• The airlines involved will need to sign an agreement after all legalities have been negotiated.
• Integrate management, routing structures, develop and obtain regulatory approvals concerning maintenance operations and conduct training.
• Then there is the Labor phase to consolidate and combine their respective work groups.

For the consumer or traveler:

• Traveler’s previously purchased tickets are usually honored with no problems.  (Occasionally flights have to be cancelled or rescheduled due to the merger but they try to accommodate the traveler even if they have to go to another airline to fill their needs.)
• Frequent Flyer status and points are transferred to the revised programs without any issues as well.

Once the airlines have consolidated the consumers, businesses and travel management systems feel the effects that can sometimes be good but also bad at the airport and in the market.  With less competition in most major markets the merger can reduce the amount of schedules offered and no longer at the lower fares.  Passengers that were loyal to their particular airlines may start to look elsewhere for cheaper flights and to those who offer more departures on additional days and times, all depending on what other airlines are offering at the time.

Consolidation can cause the merged airline’s routes to overlap and for certain cities with major hubs this causes a loss in service for one or the other airlines therefore creating fewer flight schedules.  This eventually can cut into the offered non-stop flights that were previously offered and reduce the benefits that were previously given to a traveler who frequents those routes.

Often the high ranking companies that provide on-time service can be hindered by their partnered airline(s) if they do not meet the same requirements or performance.  It doesn’t appear to improve customer service when airlines try to become more efficient for their own gains.  After a merger has been completed the special features that once drew a consumer to their airline to begin with has been dropped from the new integrated package of services offered.  In order for the airlines to co-exist they still offer special services but without the frills and generally at a higher rate now that they are no longer competing with each other for the business.

Reduction in the flight schedules also opens up another problem.  If you reduce the availability of different times and multiple days of departures are you not opening this up to your existing competitors to jump on the opportunity to take over with offering more flights themselves gaining popularity with the public?  Yes, this may result in gradually lowering fares but at what cost to the traveler.  Can the consolidation of airlines between large low-cost and low-fare carriers partner with others and still bring balance and protection to the consumer?

And what about our fellow Federal and Business travelers, will the companies be able to or want to maintain or provide their services through the GDS (Global Distribution System) and SABRE systems that most managed travel programs use?  A lot of independent airlines have been finding ways of going out on their own and avoiding the participation in the systems so that they don’t have to participate.

Several questions come to mind when we think of how and what our future travel needs will be.  Can a consolidation or merger change those needs?  Technology has played a big part in business travel by reducing some of the need to travel for meetings, training and conferences, all with the help of the innovation into Video and conference calling and the WebEx capabilities offered to just about all businesses.  Economic hardships for the industry and consumer have had an even harder impact on how people choose to travel.  Add to this the concern for safety from airplane maintenance to the fear terrorists.

To me the positive side of this is that you have two or more airlines that are trying to work together to make a good thing happen by giving a company a second chance.

By:  Debbie Hardman 

“The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Bureau of the Government or my Agency.”

I started my government career ten years ago. There have been quite a few changes in those ten years. Change was happening when I started. At that time, my agency was converting to a new accounting system. There were a lot of growing pains during the conversion. However, I’m sure there is not one person who would want to use that antiquated system now. The accounting system that we converted to at that time was more user-friendly and had better reporting capability.

We are now in the process of converting our customers to an upgraded version of that accounting system! Once again, we are experiencing the growing pains that go along with conversions. However I am sure once we get used to the new version, we will not want to go back. We are learning new things about the accounting system every day. Our customers will benefit from this change too. We have been able to assign certain fields with important data, therefore making the reporting even better than what we were providing.

Not only are we changing accounting systems, but we will soon be converting to a new E-Gov Travel Service (ETS) system. It is hard to believe it has been eight years since we started using one of the mandated systems and that the current contract will be expiring next November. There were quite a few growing pains for our customers when they converted to the ETS system. Some agencies were using an in-house automated system, some were using a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) system, and others were still using paper! Needless to say, the conversions were not easy for us or for the document preparers and travelers.

We provided hands-on training, help desk support, written guidance and many other forms of support to the agencies. I am sure this time will be no different. Who knows what other ways we will come up with in order to get the customers adjusted to the new system. We are always trying to come up with different ways to communicate policies and procedures and to educate our travelers.

The new E-Gov contract will be in effect for 15 years. I am really anxious to see what the new ETS2 provider has to offer. My agency assisted our current ETS provider with many improvements to their system. We participated in user group meetings, questionnaires, and submitted requests for enhancements. I hope that the new system will be as good as what we have now, if not better. Therefore, I have high expectations for the new provider! We need and must stay up-to-date on the latest forms of technology, while providing easy and fast service to the government travelers. Our travelers are working under the motto, “do more with less”. Therefore, the systems that we use must be able to be accessed just about anywhere and must also be easy to use. I vision a system that can be accessed via a traveler’s cell phone from anywhere in the world. Maybe the system can be voice activated. For instance, maybe the new IPhones can be connected with the ETS2 system. It would be a convenient feature if a traveler could speak into their phone and book their reservations.

There are many changes happening in the government travel world. There is no time for boredom! It seems like the minute we get used to something, it is time for change. I am sure the new ETS2 system is not the only thing that will be changing. With the mergers of airlines, there could possibly be a change to the airline City Pair Program (CPP). We have already been notified that there is one change that is happening, which is actually no change! Most of the per diem rates for lodging and meals and incidentals (M&IE) will not be increasing this coming fiscal year. This is a first for many years. This was General Services Administration (GSA) way of cutting travel costs for FY 13.

BY PAM MORTON

“The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.”

One example of this new technology is a new door lock system that uses Bluetooth connectivity to allow guests with smartphones to bypass check-in and unlock their door simply by touching the handle. The traveler downloads the company’s app to their smartphone, enters a username and password, and the app links the reservation to their mobile device. The first day of the reservation the traveler receives a notification when their room is ready, then they enter a personal pin and gain access to their room number. The system checks you in automatically upon your presence in the lobby space. After the automatic check-in, you just touch your door handle and it recognizes you and allows you access to the room. This company is looking at other ways to use this proximity-awareness technology to enhance the guest’s stay. This is just one example of near field communication (NFC).

Contactless payment technology is a type of near field communication with a contactless, wireless means of transferring data between two objects. It is activated when two antennae communicate with each other through a magnetic field such as an NFC-enabled smartphone and an NFC-enabled point of sale payment terminal. Many stores already use this technology, but now hotels are rolling it out or testing it with trials. Some hotels are offering this type of payment in their lounges, restaurants, and gift shops. They say it takes half the time to process versus paying with cash or another type of credit or debit card. It sure makes grabbing a newspaper or a snack more convenient.

Contactless payment technology sounds great, right? Well, there is a new type of “contact” payment technology that you might see some time in the future. The technology, biometric authentication, isn’t that new, but using it for payment is. There is a Spanish hotel that is pioneering this biometric technology to allow guests to make payments with their fingertips to ensure that their guests have a secure, cash-free stay with them. With the system this hotel is using, the user sets up their account to recognize two fingerprints and links them to one or more debit and/or credit cards on their account. When the user makes a purchase, he or she just places their two fingers on the fingerprint scanner and verification and authorization is complete—no need to enter a pin code or to sign a bank receipt. This technology will make purchasing items within your hotel a snap.
In this discussion, let’s not leave out the devices themselves. Tablet computers are revolutionizing the travel industry around the world. Airlines are using tablets many ways—to log flight information, allow business-class passengers to watch movies or listen to music, conduct customer satisfaction surveys, and identify travelers that are VIPs or require special meals or other services. Now hotels worldwide are getting in on the action. Tablets are given to guests to view their bill, alter the air conditioning, switch on the lights, order room service, and even see who’s at the door via a camera. These tablets are also being used to track guest behavior so hotels can customize traveler’s preferences so they can be offered every time the guest checks in. Guests can also use translation programs offered on some tablets to help bridge communication gaps. These are just a few of the ways the hotel industry could use these devices. As the cost of these devices decreases, we are sure to see more hotels utilize these devices to enhance travelers’ experiences.

Consequently, with all of this great new technology come issues. One issue that hotels are facing when it comes to technology is that almost everyone brings with them a smart device that they want to use for many reasons—both business and personal. Of course this causes issues surrounding security, bandwidth, risk, and cost. Guests are also bringing their own movies, music, and other items that they want to utilize and playback on their devices in the room. They want to be able to stream wirelessly to the playback unit of choice (usually room TV). There are devices to cope with this, but many hotels haven’t incorporated them yet. It might be because of cost or maybe they are just trying to determine which technologies will give them the biggest bang for their buck. Hotel brands are trying to differentiate their brand from others by selecting the technology that will help them stay ahead of the curve with customer service by creating a customer experience.

Speaking as a Federal traveler trying to maximize our decreasing travel budget, I’m all for technological advances that will enhance my travel experience as long as the hotels don’t pass along the cost of these tools to the customer. Hopefully, these advancements will reduce operational costs of the hotels so they will pay for themselves and then it will be a win-win for both the travelers and the hotels.

By Angela Miller

“The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.”

This reduction in travel budgets raised the age old question:  “Why are we required to use City Pair Fares when there are penalty fares available at a much lower rate?” We’ve spent a lot of time in the last few months reviewing with our travelers the reasons we prefer that they book a City Pair Fare and not a penalty fare.

In 1980, the General Services Administration (GSA) developed the City Pair Program (CPP) to provide discounted air passenger transportation services to Federal Government travelers. Many of our travelers have noted that while the City Pair Fares are lower than the standard coach fare, penalty fares are even cheaper.

The average savings is 63%-77% below commercial full fares. A critical aspect of travel planning is flexibility and the CPP has many features that allow government travelers all the flexibility possible. We spend a lot of time pointing out that these flexibility features are what makes the City Pair Fare a better option over a penalty fare.

Features of the program include:

• Non-stop service was awarded on 95% of the markets where non-stop service was offered. This feature saves the government traveler time which means more time spent in the office and not sitting in an airport waiting for the connecting flight.

• Fares are priced on one-way routes, permitting agency travelers to plan multiple destinations. Our travelers can combine multiple trips into one and again spend less time on the road and more time in the office.

• Fares are unrestricted, meaning:

• No advance purchase required
• Tickets are fully refundable
• No charge for cancellations or changes
• Last seat availability
• No blackout periods
• No minimum or maximum length of stay required

The last feature is one of the most beneficial and cost efficient for our travelers. No advance purchase and fully refundable means that government travelers can cancel a trip at any time and receive a full refund. Trips can also be changed to accommodate changes in operational business needs and changing the reservation will not incur any additional fees or charges.

The Federal Travel Regulations (FTR) requires nearly all Federal Government travelers to use the CPP which is part of the reason GSA is able to obtain such phenomenal pricing. There are a few exceptions for not using the CPP; however, travelers that use these exceptions would have to consider the additional cost that typically goes along with standard commercial fares. With exchange fees ranging from $100 – $150 each time, a penalty fare could go from being cost efficient to very expensive in no time. In addition to the exchange fees, trips that are cancelled could mean lost funding for the agency. Penalty fares are usually non-refundable and those that do provide a refund only offer a portion of the original fare and they’re non-transferable which means that they can only be used by that same traveler. Some may come with additional restrictions and black-out periods that restrict when the ticket can be used.  Those who travel frequently for their agency may be able to use that partial refund but for the infrequent traveler, it will most likely result in lost funds for the agency.

Some airlines that do not win the contract offer federal travelers a government fare—sometimes referred to as a “me too” or discounted government (DG) fares. These fares are usually comparable to the GSA City Pair fare in price; however, they may or may not be fully refundable and may come with ticketing restrictions. Again, those restrictions need to be fully researched and taken into consideration when booking a DG fare.

Our EGov Travel System has the mandatory use of the CPP built in so that travelers can easily identify which fares are contract carriers and which ones are not. Built in system audits force travelers who did not choose the contract carrier to provide FTR justifications before completing their travel authorization. These built in controls encourage the use of the CPP and keep our travelers in compliance with federal travel regulations as well as help our customers maintain better control of their travel budgets.

Agencies should take into consideration the nature of a trip and the probability of a reservation change or cancellation before allowing travelers to use a penalty fare over the GSA City Pair Fare. Something as simple as a weather delay or cancellation could end up costing an agency much more than what they would have paid for a City Pair Fare. The bottom line is:  Yes, the City Pair Fares are still the most cost efficient choice for helping to reduce travel funding and saving the agency’s travel budget.

By Carole Byrd

Disclaimer: The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.  Use of this equipment is consistent with the agency’s policy governing limited personal use.

The basic document types an EGOV travel application can produce include an authorization, a temporary duty voucher, a local voucher, and amendment documents for both authorizations and vouchers.  Other document types can include group authorizations, blank authorizations, constructed vouchers, and interim vouchers.  The authorization documents produced from the EGOV travel application serve to create an obligating document in the financial system.  Amendments to authorizations act as the modifications to the obligating documents in the financial system.  Both the temporary duty voucher and local voucher in an EGOV travel application provide for the creation of invoices in the financial system.  Amendments to vouchers act as supplemental invoices to the original invoices in the financial system.  A group authorization created from an EGOV travel application would also provide for the establishment of obligating documents in the financial system.  In order for group authorizations to be usable for the creation of obligation documents in the financial system, the group authorization must contain details on all travelers included in the group authorization along with any differences, i.e. accounting, expense details, etc.  Blank authorizations from the EGOV travel application would also serve to create obligating documents in the financial system.  The key with blank authorizations would involve the EGOV travel application’s functional ability to create multiple vouchers from a single authorization.  Constructed and interim vouchers created from an EGOV travel application would also serve to create invoices in the financial system.  The primary concern with both constructed and interim voucher types is again the functional ability of the EGOV travel application to correctly and consistently produce the document types without error.

Determining the vendors required for the creation of each obligating and invoice document is crucial to a successful interface.  Vendors required for both the obligating and voucher documents could include the traveler (or employee), credit card vendor for centrally billed obligating items, credit card vendor for items billed to the traveler’s individual government credit card, and a third party vendor for items paid directly to a third party such as the vendor for the EGOV travel application.  Creating obligations and/or invoices in the financial system under the correct vendor for the appropriate dollar amount is reliant on the level of detail the EGOV travel application transmits for each transaction.  The EGOV travel application must be able to supply with each transaction, at a minimum, the expenses broken down by vendor or vendor type and expense category in order to create an obligating document and/or invoice in the financial system.

The accounting requirements of the financial system must be taken into consideration when developing an interface for the EGOV travel application to the accounting system.  The EGOV travel application should be analyzed to determine the availability for accounting flexfields along with the total number of characters the EGOV travel application can transmit for a line of accounting.  To reduce the required number of characters an EGOV travel application is required to transfer, the interface can default values that are the same for all transactions.  Using an alias for some or all of the accounting elements housed in the EGOV travel application is also a method of reducing the number of characters required for the EGOV travel application to transmit to the financial system.  The use of alias account values would, however, require additional coding in order to crosswalk the values along with the additional time and effort needed to maintain the crosswalk going forward.

The travel specific information transferred to the financial system from the EGOV travel application will be dependent primarily on the information available that accompanies each transaction from the EGOV travel application and the fields available in the financial system to house the information.  The basis of what is needed to be housed in the financial system should be driven by expected reporting needs of the agency(s).  Travel specific information that is generally required with some financial reporting include the begin trip date, end trip date, authorization number from the EGOV travel application, and traveler name.  Other travel specific information routinely requested is the trip purpose of the travel and the per diem location(s) for the trip.  The financial system may have limited fields to house the travel specific information needed for reporting purposes.  In the case of limited fields in the financial system, it is possible to use a delimiter such as a pipe, colon, or semi-colon in order to segregate multiple values in one in a single field.

By Grant Brown
“The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.”

Now I personally have not had to cross the IDL. But with my experience as a customer service representative, this topic is highly confusing for travelers, and therefore I have researched it many times as well as have explained it many times. Sometimes travelers will call our agency travel help desk to ask why the ETS system is calculating their per diem incorrectly. What they don’t realize is that they are crossing the IDL and the ETS system is actually calculating their per diem correctly. Other times we receive calls from travelers who are aware they are crossing the IDL, but have no idea how the ETS system is calculating their per diem. They simply just want an explanation how the calculation is being performed. I say ‘simply,’ but most of the time, the IDL is anything but simple.

By: Susan Crouser
“The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.”

Federal travelers are able to achieve the best deals on airfare available.  CPP averages savings of 70% below full, commercial air fares.  In addition, CPP features benefits that allow Government travelers supreme flexibility.

When you use the City Pair Program, Fares are unrestricted, meaning:

No Advance purchase required – you get the same great deal anytime
No minimum or maximum length of stay required
Tickets are fully refundable
No airline fee for cancellations or changes
Last seat availability
No blackout periods

In many city pairs, there are two contract fares, also known as Dual Fares: a highly discounted unrestricted fare (YCA), and a capacity controlled fare (_CA) with an even deeper discount.  _CA fares have a limited number of seats, but no other restrictions.  _CA seat availability on a particular flight varies carrier-by-carrier and market-by-market.  These capacity controlled fares provide all the benefits of CPP and are at the deepest discount but need to be booked well in advance of travel.

If your Agency policy permits you to use commercial fares, available to the general public, and the commercial fare is cheaper than the CPP fare, then you can book that fare.  Many commercial fares are non-refundable and carry penalties and it is important to take all potential penalties into consideration when comparing a commercial fare to a CPP fare.  Penalties include change fees and non-refundable tickets.

The airline carriers charge a change fee to travel agents that do not reissue a ticket when a traveler makes a voluntary change to a ticketed transaction.  This is a policy between the airlines and travel agents and not part of the City Pair Program contract, but applies to all the respective air carriers’ business.

If a travel agent does not change the record, the carrier won’t be able to determine if a flight is overbooked or if additional monies should be collected or refunded as a result of the change.  When the traveler checks in, that person’s record will not show the most recent changes which may impact his/her ability to board that flight.

The airlines are not charging the government this change fee; rather, the airlines are charging this fee to the travel agent if the travel agent does not reissue the ticket when a change was made after the ticket was issued.  The charge is not imposed when the travel agent reissues tickets to reflect voluntary changes.

Due to the continued volatility in fuel costs, the City Pair Program is allowing airlines to assess a fuel surcharge to domestic or international contract fares under the following conditions:

The fuel surcharge may only be assessed on fares corresponding to the contract fares after the surcharge has been in place commercially for a minimum of 14 consecutive days.
The fuel surcharge may not be higher than that imposed commercially.
The fuel surcharge will be assessed at the time of ticket issuance.
The fuel surcharge will be removed from the contract fares when it is no longer imposed commercially on the applicable fares in a market.

While the booking of the contract fares (YCA) is guaranteed, as long as economy class seats are available, choice of a particular seat is not guaranteed. Seat assignments are under the discretion of the carriers. Many airlines do not make seat selection available until very close to the flight’s time and date.  Therefore, we strongly suggest all travelers confirm seat assignments as early as allowed.

In addition, early arrival for check-in at the airport or online check-in before arriving at the airport is recommended. Travelers run the risk of losing pre-reserved seats with late check-in times, as seat assignments may be released close to departure time and given to other passengers. It should also be noted, that at times, seat assignments may change when there is a change of equipment or a need to accommodate a family, group or disabled person.

Code sharing is a commercial agreement between two airlines that allows an airline to put its two-letter identification code on the flights of another airline as they appear in computerized reservations systems.

For example, Delta Airlines might have an agreement to operate flights for United Airlines on a route. This flight would be listed under United’s identification code (UA) but actually operated by Delta Airlines.

Most airlines, including all City Pair Program contract carriers, participate in some type of commercial code-share agreement. These agreements allow carriers to expand their service offerings without additional resources, equipment and costs.

Due to these business agreements, many of the carriers cannot legally obligate their code-share partners’ inventories for YCA (unrestricted) contract fares.

In conclusion, to get the best price and benefits, book your government travel using the City Pair Program.

By:  Crystal Horner

Disclaimer: The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.

In accordance with the Department of Defense (DoD) Financial Management Regulation (FMR) Volume 9, Chapter 5, the orders for travelers must specify the actual TDY duty location For example, if a traveler is going TDY to Ft. Bliss, TX, the travel orders must explicitly state “Ft. Bliss, TX”, not El Paso, TX. The Approving Official (AO) should ensure that the correct TDY location is entered before approving the traveler’s orders in the Defense Travel System (DTS) because currently there is no systematic fix or control.

All travelers are encouraged to use Government quarters if available when on orders to a U.S. Installation as opposed to a geographic location like a town or city. An agency may direct uniformed members to do so, provided they are TDY to a U.S. installation (example: TDY to Ft. Sam Houston), not to a city (TDY to San Antonio, TX), and the Government quarters are on the U.S. installation to which the traveler was sent TDY. The Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR) requires uniformed service members on orders to a U.S. Installation to check for Government quarters availability at the site to which they are temporarily assigned.

The Joint Travel Regulation (JTR) prohibits civilian employees from being directed to use Government quarters. Also, civilian employees lodging reimbursement cannot be limited to the Government quarters cost (Comp. Gen. 626 (1965)). A DoD civilian employee is not required to check Government quarters availability in the following circumstances:
• When TDY is at other than a U.S. installation.
• When an AO determines Government quarters use would adversely affect mission performance NOTE: An employee in a Senior Level (SL) position, Scientific and Professional (ST) position and an SES employee (including individuals described under 5 USC 5703) determine their own quarters availability.
• During en route travel periods.
• For TDY/delay of less than 24 hours at one location.

DTS cannot be used to reserve Government quarters, only to record the cost of the room. To reserve military lodging, the traveler must contact Commercial Travel Office (CTO) or the lodging facility directly to make the arrangements and determine the lodging cost. The traveler must enter the lodging cost in the DTS authorization on the Per Diem Entitlements screen accessed through the Expenses tab in the main navigation bar. If a military traveler removes the check mark for Quarters Available at a military location with military quarters available while creating an authorization in DTS, DTS will require that the traveler justify why the military quarters were not used, and the AO should ensure that an adequate justification is entered.

When Government quarters are available on the U.S. installation to which the employee is TDY, the proper authority may prescribe a reduced per diem rate based on the Government quarters cost and potentially other reduced costs. Such authority must be requested and authorized in advance of the travel dates for which the reduction is desired. A fixed per diem may not exceed the locality per diem rates prescribed for the locality concerned. (JTR, par. C4550.) The AO may direct adequate available Government quarters use for a uniformed member on a U.S. installation only if the uniformed member is TDY to that U.S. installation. If an agency directs use of Government quarters, but a uniformed traveler uses other lodging, the uniformed traveler may only be reimbursed up to the Government quarters’ cost unless the voucher or ‘should-cost’ reflects a quarters non-availability number ((44 Comp. Gen. 626 (1965)).

When the traveler stays in commercial lodging if Government quarters are not available, the agency must authorize commercial lodging for the traveler. The traveler is reimbursed for the single occupancy rate, up to the maximum per diem rate for the TDY or stopover point if travel is over several days. When Government quarters are not available at the TDY station, the TDY locality per diem rate or the Actual Expense Allowance (AEA) based on that locality per diem rate applies.
Per diem cannot be limited based on the presence of ‘nearby’ Government quarters, such as quarters not on the U.S. installation to which the member is assigned TDY, but another ‘nearby’ U.S. installation or other uniformed facility.
It appears that enforcement of this policy is primarily dependent on the understanding and due diligence of the AO when reviewing travel orders in DTS. While DTS does have some systematic controls, this is primarily an issue of proper oversight. To increase awareness of the regulations at our agency, our office created a digital sign to be posted on electronic message boards located throughout the complex, and we emphasize this information in our AO training sessions. Increasing awareness of this requirement should result in compliance with these regulations.

References
• Government Quarters Frequently Asked Questions, Defense Travel Management Office (https://www.defensetravel.dod.mil/site/faqgovqtr.cfm)
• JTR Ch 1: DoD Employee Travel Administration, Part B: Conditions/Factors, C1055 GOV’T QTRS USE/AVAILABILITY
• JFTR Ch 1: General, Part A: Applicability & General Information, U1045 GOV’T QTRS USE/AVAILABILITY
• Quarters reservations website — http://www.dodlodging.net.
• DoD FMR

K. Barnoski, 2012. Disclaimer: The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.

The number one thing for cardholders to remember is that the government issued travel charge card is to be used for “official government travel only”.  Even though the charge card is in the cardholders’ name and goes against their personal credit history, it is still only to be used for government travel.  It is hard for some individuals to understand that since the financial responsibility of the card is theirs, why they can’t use it whenever they choose.

When a cardholder applies for a government charge card, they are given the bank’s cardholder agreement.  This agreement lists the rules and regulations of the issuing bank.  This account agreement clearly states that the card is to be used for official travel only and is not to be used for personal, family, or household purposes.

One way our agency has helped to ensure cardholders do not use their charge cards for personal use is by blocking two-thirds of the Merchant Category Codes (MCC).  An MCC is assigned to a vendor when they start accepting charge cards for payment.  By blocking MCC’s that are not government travel related, (adult entertainment, movie theaters, etc.), individuals are restricted to where they can use their charge cards.  If the cardholder traveling on official business has their card declined because of a blocked MCC and the expense is allowed, the cardholder can contact our office.  We can temporarily unblock the MCC to allow the transaction to be completed.

On a monthly basis, management reviews reports provided by the issuing bank which details the use of the individually billed travel (IBT) cards.  If misuse and abuse is found, the cardholder would be subjected to disciplinary action.  It is important to remember if there are transactions that are not valid, they need to be disputed timely.  Any late fees charged by the vendor on undisputed charges are the responsibility of the cardholder.  If the delinquency on the account is large enough, the agency may choose to establish a salary offset until the balance is paid in full.

A second thing cardholders must remember is to reconcile their statements.  As a government cardholder, it is his/her responsibility to reconcile the account.  When an employee travels on official government business, their transportation and lodging costs along with any booking fees will be charged to their charge card.  Other miscellaneous items such as meals, parking, tolls, excessive baggage, and rental cars may also be charged to the account.  Once the cardholder returns from travel, they need to voucher within five days.

Our agency has implemented the mandatory use of split disbursement.  This means when a traveler is creating an authorization/voucher, they can automatically allocate the amount of reimbursement needed to cover all expenses that were charged on the travel card and the money will be sent to the charge card company.  When creating the voucher, the cardholder should review expenses posted on their card account and voucher accordingly.  For most expenses, the method of reimbursement can be changed from being paid directly to the traveler to his/her charge card via split disbursement.  The electronic travel system will also allow the cardholder to send additional money from what they personally would be reimbursed to cover those items where the method of reimbursement could not be changed, (for example, meals).

Under the GSA Smart Pay Master Contract, awarded banks must provide an Electronic Access System, (EAS) which allows cardholders to log online to verify transactions that are placed on their charge card.  The EAS was added as a requirement to help the “go green” initiative set forth by the President.  By utilizing the EAS, cardholders can more accurately voucher because they can see all transactions that have posted to their account, even those transactions posted between statements.  It is important for cardholders to learn how to use the EAS system to keep their accounts reconciled because unpaid past due balances will affect their personal credit score.

Another item to remember is that the charge card is in the name of a specific traveler and can only be used by that specific cardholder.  If a group of individuals are traveling on business together, one charge card should not be used to reserve multiple rooms.  Each individual will need to have a unique charge card number on the reservation.

These are the main reminders for government cardholders.  They should not fall into the trap and state that they did not know the rules of the proper use of the charge card.  It is the cardholders’ responsibility to know the rules before using the charge card.  The account agreement is given to the cardholder when they first apply for the card and each agency must have travel policies based on federal regulations that must be followed.  Cardholders just remember if in doubt, call the agency helpdesk for assistance.

By: Linda Ruppel, CGTP

The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.

Specifically for temporary duty (TDY) travel expenses, the Order recognizes the importance of travel to agency mission and functions, but at the same time asks agencies to devise strategic alternatives to travel including teleconferencing and video-conferencing.

The Treasury Department intends to issue guidance in the near future on how this can be accomplished, but Treasury Bureaus always have the option to look at ways to save travel budgets. The Travel Services Division (TSD) has identified areas of Bureau travel policy and processes that could be changed to assist with compliance to the Order and to reduce overall per trip expenses. Much of the projected amount of travel budget reductions in the Order can be achieved from the suggestions outlined below, without having to reduce the number of trips by any significant amount.

I feel with the recent events that have highlighted Federal Government travel spending since writing last year’s paper, that a follow-up would be beneficial.

There is a historical perspective that reveals unnecessary travel costs that are inherent in Government travel.  First, there is no training mandate. The Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) tasks travel approving officials with authorizing and approving travel in a prudent manner and in accordance with established Federal and Agency/Bureau policies. While this responsibility is evident in the FTR, travel approvers authorize and approve expenses in many cases without this understanding and as a result, far too many travel documents contain errors that result in the Bureau paying more than is needed for official trips.

Secondly, the E-Gov travel service (eTS) as required by the FTR is limited by design. The eTS is an automated system of travel authorizations and vouchers.  Our Bureau’s eTS system is GovTrip which has many of the critical policy audits in place that require justifications to the approver. However, no system can ensure all policy requirements are met without reliance on travel approvers who have knowledge of the policy and financial implications of this function.

Third, our Bureau travel policy while very thorough can be enhanced to gain further controls and cost savings. The FTR requires an Agency or Bureau to have policies in place for certain items as described in the FTR.  While the existing BPD travel policy fulfills these requirements, there are still some things the Bureau can do to increase savings in the overall travel budget by making policies clearer and more in line with the FTR and best practices. [2]

Fourth, there are reimbursement errors that are found through our post payment travel audit process. TSD is required by OMB guidelines to conduct post payment audits of a representative sample of paid travel voucher, to include a 100% audit of all travel documents that exceed $2,500. Overpayments discovered during this process are collected back from the traveler.  TSD finds numerous instances of overpayments that need to be collected from travelers primarily because the approving official did not question the expense when the document was approved by them for payment.

To illustrate how understanding the FTR and Bureau policy can affect travel expenses, a travel approving official can authorize a TDY trip following FTR guidelines and still have the trip more expensive than it otherwise would have been if the approver had knowledge of all the rules. TSD recently presented a sample trip in a training class showing this. A hypothetical trip from Columbus to Las Vegas following the FTR cost $1,756 compared to the same trip with interpretation of the FTR applied with a cost of $763.  While this example is extreme and would not have every principle applied in every case, it does show the control approving officials have in authorizing travel expenses.

There are quite a few things TSD can do to achieve travel cost savings.  The number one thing we plan to recommend to our Executive Board is that because there is no provision for mandatory training for travel approvers to fully understand how they must discharge their responsibilities in adhering to travel regulations and policies, BPD should either strongly encourage or mandate training for all travel approvers in order to become more fiscally responsible as stated in the Executive Order. A training requirement currently exists for Government Travel charge card holders to have initial and annual refresher training on use of the card.  TDS feels this training requirement should also be in place for travel approvers. TSD can provide online or classroom training through GSA or our office.

The rationale for this mandatory training requirement is because of the perception that approving travel for an official trip seems to many approvers  like an easy task, but in reality, there must be a great deal of thought given to the process. Travel approving officials have a two-part job.  Approvers not only authorize what can be spent in the travel authorization, they must also verify what was actually spent on the travel voucher. In financial terms, they are obligating funds in their travel budget and approving them for disbursement as payment to the traveler and/or associated vendors. Approvers should be aware of the importance of performing a thorough review of all travel documents, justifications, and receipts before electronically approving them in the E-Travel system.

Approvers may only authorize travel expenses that are necessary to accomplish the Government’s mission. In this current climate of reduced travel budgets, this function is even more important. Approvers must evaluate the need for the travel and whether or not alternatives such as teleconferencing, webcasts, or other means could be used. Approvers must ensure travelers exercise the same care as a prudent person would exercise if traveling at his/her own expense. In addition, travel approvers must also take into account policy considerations as outlined in the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) as well as BPD policy. So what in particular do travel approvers look for?

In the travel authorization, approvers must determine:

• If a City Pair contract airline flight is selected, or if a valid FTR justification is provided;
• The mode of travel is selected and advantageous to the Government, or the traveler’s reimbursement is limited to the constructive cost of travel;
• Travel is routed by the most cost effective means;
• If the traveler is taking leave or planning personal travel in conjunction with official travel. Traveler must provide a cost comparison if adding personal to official travel;
• A Government vehicle is used if available, before a rental car;
• Courtesy transportation is used when available;
• Public transportation is used before a taxi cab;
• Per diem location selected is where the official business is conducted;
• Lodging selected is FedRooms and FEMA approved, or justification provided;
• The E-Travel system was used for all transportation and lodging reservations;
• The correct accounting is selected.

In the travel voucher, approvers verify:

• Receipts are attached electronically to the voucher and are valid and legible;
• Receipts match the claimed expenses;
• The daily lodging rate matches the receipt;
• Actual expense, if authorized does not exceed 300% of per diem.
• Lodging taxes for domestic travel claimed on the non-mileage expense section;
• If meals were provided or leave taken, per diem entitlements are adjusted;
• TMC fee is not claimed automatically and in ‘Other Transportation’;
• Miscellaneous expenses are valid and documented;
• Traveler used the proper form of payment for expenses;
• Any travel advances are properly deducted in the voucher amount;
• The travel claim is properly prepared in accordance with the FTR and BPD travel policy;
• Unused tickets are returned to the TMC for a credit;
• The accuracy of claimed amounts compared to the required receipts and justifications;
• All business calls and internet charges were necessary to perform official business;
• All personal calls were made to average $10 per day.  Travelers may not just claim this daily amount;
• Approvers should question or disapprove any claimed expenses which were either not authorized or are contrary to policy.

For all the above complexities involved in approving travel authorizations and vouchers, mandatory or highly encouraged approving official training will go a long way toward the goal of reducing unnecessary travel costs. [3]

TSD also plans to ensure our Bureau travel policy is aligned with current and future regulations and adopts best practices in order to achieve cost savings. While we will have many recommendations, some of the highlights are shown below.

One recommendation is to emphasize lodging alternatives to the approvers. The FTR requires first consideration of the FedRooms lodging program.  FedRooms properties guarantee rates to be at or below the per diem rate.  In the current economic climate, the majority of FedRooms properties offer rates that average $23 per night lower than the established per diem rate.[4] Far too many travelers call specific hotels based on personal preference or use of frequent stay points resulting in the Government paying more for lodging in many cases. TSD recommends instructing travel approvers to ensure hotel reservations are made in GovTrip and with FedRooms properties. Using FedRooms whenever possible can save the Bureau thousands of travel budget dollars annually.

Another recommendation to approvers is to consider how the trip is routed.  Approvers are required by the FTR to route travel by the most cost effective and usually traveled route. BPD needs a policy stating approvers must look at alternate airports in addition to Port Columbus when the mode of transportation selected is common carrier. The fact that Parkersburg has no viable air service and traveler must depart from Columbus Ohio for trips involving common carrier, surrounding airports should also be considered from a cost standpoint.  Pittsburgh, PA, Charleston, WV, Clarksburg, WV and Akron/Canton airports among others should be looked at by travelers and approvers. These airports also have contract City Pair fares, and/or commercial fares far cheaper than Port Columbus. Approvers can achieve substantial savings when considering alternate airports.

Evaluating the need for transportation at the TDY site is another important recommendation.  BPD policy should clearly state the FTR provisions of the hierarchy of authorizing transportation at the temporary duty site. Too often, approvers authorize a taxi cab at the TDY location when courtesy or public transportation is available for free or low cost. We have seen instances where rental cars are approved in areas with viable courtesy and public transportation. Not only is parking needed for the rental car, we have seen the cases where the car was provided simply to get from the airport to the hotel where the conference was held, so the car was not used during the trip. Other cases involved both a rental car and taxi cab reimbursement at the TDY location. Clear BPD guidance will save transportation expenses while on TDY.

Airport parking is another area of emphasis for travel approvers.  Travelers departing Parkersburg, WV on flights normally use Port Columbus International Airport in Columbus, Ohio due to the high cost and connection problems departing from Parkersburg. Port Columbus offers three long term parking lots ranging from $4 per day to $9 per day, with the difference in cost stemming from the proximity to the terminal. BPD should create a policy to require travelers to use the lower cost green lot or limit reimbursement to the cost of the green lot. While per trip savings are small, the overall cost savings for this expense an annual basis for the Bureau is high.

TSD believes adopting these and other recommendations can achieve substantial savings in the Bureau’s travel budget with a minimum of cost and impact. This would then allow us to be in compliance with the President’s Executive Order to Promote Efficient Spending as well as becoming more efficient stewards of the public’s money.

By Daniel Carozza 

Disclaimer: The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.