BNUMBER: B-272985
DATE: December 30, 1996
TITLE: Central Intelligence Agency--Meal Expenses For Security
Detail
**********************************************************************
Matter of:Central Intelligence Agency--Meal Expenses For Security
Detail
File: B-272985
Date:December 30, 1996
DIGEST
The Central Intelligence Agency may not use appropriated funds to pay
all or part of the cost of meals purchased by members of the Director
of Central Intelligence's security detail while providing 24-hour
security to the Director or Deputy Director. Appropriated funds may
not be used to provide subsistence or to purchase meals for federal
employees while working at their normal duty station, even when
working under unusual circumstances. Exceptions to this rule may be
made only in extreme emergency situations involving danger to human
life or destruction of federal property.
DECISION
The General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has asked
whether the CIA may reimburse from appropriated funds members of the
Director of Central Intelligence's security detail for meals purchased
by them while on duty. For the reasons indicated below, we conclude
that appropriated funds may not be used to pay for these meals.
BACKGROUND
According to the CIA, the security detail is responsible for providing
24-hour personal protection for the Director and Deputy Director of
Central Intelligence. The duties of the security detail require that
its members travel with the Director or Deputy Director to
appointments and engagements and remain in line of sight of the
official they are protecting. On occasion members of the detail must
accompany one of the officials to restaurants in the Washington
metropolitan area. To maintain line-of-sight contact with the
official and not draw attention to themselves, members of the detail
sit at a nearby table in the restaurant. Some restaurants require
that members of the detail order meals while sitting at these tables.
The cost of these meals, often substantial, has been borne by the
individual members of the detail.
The CIA suggests that because the meals for the security detail would
not be purchased but for the need to provide protection to the
Director or Deputy
Director, the government rather than security detail members should
pay the cost of the meals.
DISCUSSION
Section 5536, of title 5, United States Code, provides that no
employee of the government may receive any pay or allowances in
addition to that provided by statute "unless specifically authorized
by law." Because of this prohibition, without specific statutory
authority, the government may not pay subsistence expenses in addition
to an employee's regular compensation, or furnish free food to
civilian employees at headquarters even if the employees are working
under unusual circumstances. E.g., B-234813, November 9, 1989; 42
Comp. Gen. 149 (1962).
There are numerous examples in which the Congress has overridden the
restriction in 5 U.S.C. sec. 5536 to specifically authorize agencies to
pay for employees' meals. E.g., 5 U.S.C. sec. 5536a (subsistence and
travel expenses authorized for law enforcement personnel and their
families when their lives are threatened). There is no applicable
statute in this case. Even where there is no specific statutory
authority, we have not objected to the purchase of meals for employees
working in unanticipated emergency situations involving danger to
human life or destruction of federal property. B-232487, January 26,
1989; 53 Comp. Gen. 71 (1973). As we recognized in 53 Comp. Gen. 71,
this is a narrow exception:
". . . whether payment of such expenses would be proper in
similar cases that may arise in the future would necessarily
depend on the facts and circumstances present in each case,
having in mind that work in occupations such as those of
policemen, firemen, security guards, etc., often is required to
be performed under emergent and dangerous conditions and that
fact alone does not warrant departure from the general rule
against payment for employees' meals from appropriated funds."
53 Comp. Gen. at 75. Here, the CIA concedes that members of the
security detail may not receive meals at government expense under the
emergency exception because they are not faced with extreme life
threatening emergencies.
We addressed an almost identical situation in B-202104, July 2, 1981.
In that case the Department of the Treasury asked whether it could
reimburse Secret Service agents all or part of the cost of meals they
were required to purchase while providing 24-hour protection to public
officials. We concluded that the Department could not use its
appropriated funds for that purpose:
"We do not find the usual 24-hour-a-day protective service
satisfies the extreme emergency situation involving danger to
human life criterion that is necessary to fit within the
exception to the rule. And under the rule the increased cost of
food due to unusual working conditions is not a sufficient reason
by itself to pay for the costs of meals out of appropriated
funds. . . .
"Accordingly, payment of an allowance to the Secret Service
agents for meals during their 24-hour-a-day protective service at
headquarters may not be made from the Department of the
Treasury's appropriations. Further, purchase of meals for these
agents while they are required to stay in high cost hotels during
24-hour-a-day protective assignments is not authorized . . . ."
The CIA asks that we create another exception to the requirement for
specific statutory authority to permit payment for meals out of
appropriated funds when the members of the security detail purchase
the meals in order to carry out their assigned duties. The agency
suggests that it is fundamentally unfair to require members of the
detail to purchase meals at their own expense when the only reason
they purchase the meals is to carry out their task of guarding the
Director or Deputy Director. The CIA asks that we view the costs of
the meals (and presumably any other increased expenses incurred by
members of the security detail in the discharge of their duties) as
necessary expenses of the agency's overall operations because guarding
the Director and Deputy Director is clearly an authorized function of
the CIA.
We understand that the cost of purchasing meals may be a hardship for
members of the detail. There are, however, many unusual situations in
which federal employers must bear expenses as a result of their
employment, including the purchase of more expensive meals than they
would otherwise buy. E.g., B-204104, July 2, 1981; B-194798,
January 23, 1980. While we have not objected to the use of
appropriated funds for meals in some emergency situations, the
situation presented by the CIA provides no basis for avoiding the
statutory scheme. To the extent the hardship of purchasing meals
interferes with the CIA's ability to recruit and retain qualified
staff for security details, it should seek specific statutory
authority to permit it to buy meals for its employees.
Comptroller General
of the United States
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
