The use of government-owned vehicles for the comfort or health and welfare of personnel in deployed or remote locations

Army Lawyer, April, 2007 by Thomas H. Dobbs

1. Federal Aviation Administration: Subparagraph (c)

In Federal Aviation Administration, the regional administrator in Alaska for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) asked for clarification on "whether it may permit employees on temporary duty [two weeks] at a remote duty location [Cold Bay, Alaska] where no other transportation is available to use government vehicles for transportation to and from recreational sites during their off-duty hours." (35) The regional administrator reported that Cold Bay was "a small, remote community" and that recreational activities were "limited to satellite television, hiking, hunting, fishing, the Cold Bay Federal Community Services Facility, chapel, Ceramics Club and a Rod and Gun Club." (36) In addition, no public transportation was available and private vehicles were not authorized. (37) The employees used FAA vehicles while performing official duties at Cold Bay, but these GOVs were generally not in use after duty hours. (38) The regional administrator concluded that using the FAA vehicles for travel to recreational sites after duty hours was necessary for the employees' health and welfare, but referred the issue to the GAO for guidance on whether the language of subparagraph (c) of 41 C.F.R. [section] 301-10.201 extended to recreational activities. (39)

The GAO responded in the affirmative. The Comptroller General opined that, "[w]ith reasonable limitations and safeguards, such use may be authorized under [subparagraph (c) of 41 C.F.R. [section] 301-10.201] of the Federal Travel Regulations that authorizes the use of government-furnished vehicles for transportation to 'places necessary for the sustenance, comfort, or health of the employee to foster continued efficient performance of Government business." (40) In reaching its opinion, the Comptroller General reasoned that limited use of GOVs for recreational purposes at Cold Bay, in light of the conditions there, was unobjectionable, "provided the policy contained adequate controls to prevent abuse and ensure accountability." (41) The opinion noted that the application of this provision is a matter "left to a reasonable degree of agency discretion." (42) Boosted by the Comptroller General's expansive interpretation in Federal Aviation Administration, the ramifications of subparagraph (c) of 41 C.F.R. [section] 301-10.201 on the use of GOVs in the military for life support activities are significant.

2. The Ramifications of Subparagraph (c)

The ramifications of subparagraph (c) of 41 C.F.R. [section] 301-10.201 are two-fold. First, subparagraph (c) is the foundation for the DOD's use of GOVs for non-recreational life support activities for members on temporary duty. (43) Second, subparagraph (c), in conjunction with the liberal interpretation by the GAO in Federal Aviation Administration, authorizes the use of GOVs for recreational life support activities under limited circumstances. (44) This article now discusses each of these ramifications, beginning with GOV support for non-recreational life support activities.