DOD Section 6 School Board Members-Invitational Travel

Case: B-260896 Agency: Protester: DOD Section 6 School Board Members Date: 1996-10-17 Denied
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-260896 Oct 17, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Their travel was necessary to carry out their statutory duty under 20 U.S.C. Their participation provided a direct benefit to the government for which reimbursement of travel expenses is warranted under 5 U.S.C. DECISION The issue raised is the propriety of paying invitational travel and per diem expenses to nongovernment DOD Section 6 Dependent School Board members for travel to state conferences and workshops sponsored by the State School Board Associations. We conclude that the travel provided a direct benefit to the government for which reimbursement of travel expenses is warranted under 5 U.S.C. BACKGROUND This advance decision is made at the request of Paul Schnittger. Section 241 permitted the Secretary of Education to establish free public education in the United States if it were otherwise unavailable as a result of official action by state or local governmental authority and if no local agency were able to provide suitable free public education. View Decision Matter of: DOD Section 6 School Board Members-Invitational Travel Orders File: B-260896 Date: October 17, 1996 Payment may be certified for invitational travel expenses incurred by five nongovernment DOD Section 6 School Board members elected pursuant to Sec. 6 of Public Law 81-874, since repealed, to attend school board conferences to participate in and keep abreast of current and essential educational issues that impacted the public schools. Their travel was necessary to carry out their statutory duty under 20 U.S.C. Sec. 241(h) (1988) to "oversee school expenditures and operations." Their participation provided a direct benefit to the government for which reimbursement of travel expenses is warranted under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5703. DECISION The issue raised is the propriety of paying invitational travel and per diem expenses to nongovernment DOD Section 6 Dependent School Board members for travel to state conferences and workshops sponsored by the State School Board Associations. We conclude that the travel provided a direct benefit to the government for which reimbursement of travel expenses is warranted under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5703. BACKGROUND This advance decision is made at the request of Paul Schnittger, Commander, SC, USN, Director for Field Support, Defense Finance and Accounting Service, Cleveland Center (DFAS), to determine whether he may certify for payment certain expenses resulting from invitational travel of Department of Defense Section 6 school board members elected pursuant to Sec. 6 of Public Law 81-874, September 30, 1950 (since repealed pursuant to Public Law 103-382, October 20, 1994), and formerly codified at 20 U.S.C. Sec. 241(g) and (h). Section 241 permitted the Secretary of Education to establish free public education in the United States if it were otherwise unavailable as a result of official action by state or local governmental authority and if no local agency were able to provide suitable free public education. Sections 241(g) and (h) provided for the establishment of a school board as follows: "(g) Elective school boards "The Secretary shall ensure the establishment of an elective school board in schools assisted under this section. Such school board shall be composed of a minimum of three members, elected by the parents of students in attendance at such school. The Secretary shall, by regulation, establish procedures for carrying out such school board elections as provided in this subsection. "(h) School board oversight of school expenditures and operations "A school board established pursuant to subsection (g) of this section shall be empowered to oversee school expenditures and operations, subject to audit procedures established by the Secretary, and other provisions of this section." The statute was silent with respect to travel by school board members. Four of the board members in question (Sherry Brisendine, Roberta Chappell, Beth Patrick, and Cathy Young) represented the School Board at the Fort Campbell, Kentucky, Section 6 Dependent School; and one board member (Ms. Tammy Laurence), represented the School Board at the Fort Bragg, North Carolina, Section 6 Dependent School. All were nongovernment employees who were issued invitational travel orders by the United States Government. Department of Defense officials invited the four school board members from Fort Campbell to travel to Louisville, Kentucky, to attend a three-day conference in February 1994 sponsored by the Kentucky School Board Association.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...