[Letter]

B-271896 Mar 04, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Relief is granted to State Department Class B Cashier where proximate cause of loss was not negligent practices of the cashier. Kaplan: This is in response to your request that we grant relief from liability under 31 U.S.C. Gautreau's actions were not the proximate cause of this loss. The exact cause and nature of this loss is not known despite an Embassy investigation following the discovery of the loss. What is known is that on April 28. Gautreau's cash account was conducted by the Embassy's Budget and Fiscal Officer. (The United Stated currency account did not have a shortage.). The cash count was repeated a few days later. The budget officer departed for a planned vacation shortly after he discovered the loss and was not available to help the cashier in her efforts to reconcile the shortage. View Decision B-271896, March 4, 1997 DIGEST Sidney Kaplan Chairman Committee of Inquiry Into Fiscal Irregularities Department of State Dear Mr. Kaplan: This is in response to your request that we grant relief from liability under 31 U.S.C. Sec. 3527 to Ms. Vilma Gautreau, Class B Cashier, at the American Embassy in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, for the unexplained loss of 119,036 Dominican Republic pesos, worth $15,835, from her account. As explained in further detail below, we grant relief because we agree with your finding that Ms. Gautreau's actions were not the proximate cause of this loss. As noted above, the exact cause and nature of this loss is not known despite an Embassy investigation following the discovery of the loss. What is known is that on April 28, 1992, an unannounced audit of Ms. Gautreau's cash account was conducted by the Embassy's Budget and Fiscal Officer, revealing a shortage of local currency funds worth $15,835. (The United Stated currency account did not have a shortage.) The audit consisted of a cash count of both the local and U.S. currencies, and a reconciliation of the paid vouchers, "in-transit vouchers," and collections. The cash count was repeated a few days later, with no success at reconciling the shortage. Unfortunately, the budget officer departed for a planned vacation shortly after he discovered the loss and was not available to help the cashier in her efforts to reconcile the shortage. Upon returning from his vacation, the budget officer reported the shortage on June 9, 1992. Following a review of the situation, the Regional Administrative Management Center for the American Embassy, Federal District of Mexico, (RAMC) was not convinced that a shortage actually existed. RAMC advised the Embassy to limit cashier hours and activate an alternate cashier to receive consular receipts in order to alleviate the extremely heavy workload with which Ms. Gautreau had to deal. This recommendation was based, in part, on a prior fact-finding trip conducted between October 28 and November 8, 1991. (A disbursing official of RAMC conducted a fact finding trip to review the cashier functions at the American Embassy in Santo Domingo.) The RAMC report concluded that the cashier, Ms. Gautreau, faced a heavy workload, there was insufficient staffing which caused delays in processing transactions, and deposits were not made on a timely basis. RAMC recommended that the Embassy ensure that the cashier was able to keep the documentation current and that the cashier have sufficient uninterrupted time to keep up with her paperwork. Based on your Committee's review of the circumstances of this shortage, you have concluded that the loss occurred in the performance of Ms. Gautreau's official duties and was not the result of an illegal or incorrect payment. Rather, you have concluded that the loss occurred because of the pervasive laxity with which the Embassy managed the cashier's office. The Committee recommended that Ms. Gautreau be relieved of liability for the loss and that the Embassy's Budget and Fiscal Officer be reprimanded for failure to follow prescribed procedures. The Committee also noted the lack of effective oversight provided by Embassy management officials, and, in particular, Embassy management's repeated failure to implement the applicable fiscal regulations or follow the Committee's recommendations for corrective action. This Office is authorized to grant relief from liability upon its concurrence with determinations by the department or agency that (1) the loss or deficiency occurred while the accountable officers or agents were acting in the discharge of their official duties, or that it occurred by reason of the acts or omissions of subordinates, and (2) that the loss or deficiency occurred without fault or negligence on the part of the accountable officers. 31 U.S.C. Sec. 3527(a) (1994).