TWEENS PO AIEEE eect og trae 
'Any allowance or reimbursement made to an officer or en- 
ployee for expenses incurred in going between his residence and 
his work would be in the nature of an additional compensation 
and, as such, prohibited by law, but expenses incurred in going 
from place to place in the performance of his official duties 
and to facilitate such performance are, when properly author-— 
ized, expenses incident to the work as distinguished from per- 
sonal, or what are usually termed 'travel' expenses. 
'The decisions of this office relative to travel expenses 
have no application to the case here presented because if the 
car fare of these inspectors is to be paid by the Government 
iets, tO be paid. not as a traveling expense or a personal 
expense but as a necessary expense incident to the work on 
which they may be engaged. 
'If in the adnin'stratiin of the customs service ycu d3em 
it necessary to ;urchase car tickets for the use of inspectors 
in the performance of their official duties, or to reimburse 
them for amounts expended for care fare where the purchase 
of tickets is impracticable, the appropriation in question 
is available for that purpose (20 Comp. Dec., 546; 74 MS.: 
Comp. Dec., 102, July 14, 1915). But it is not necessary, 
nor do I think it would be advisable, for you to arbitrarily 
limit the radius of an inspector's station so that he would 
be beyond the limits of his station and in a travel status 
when performing his daily or regular duties at the port.' 
also 27 Comp. Dec., 430. 
"(b). The answer to 1(b) is covered by the answer to l(a). 
"Answer No. 2. If the Department truck makes a daily trip to town 
for mail and passes the residence of the employee in question, I do 
not believe there would be any objection to this employee returning 
to the laboratory in the truck, but under no consideration could this 
arrangement be made for the convenince of the employee, as he is re- 
quired to place himself in a duty status at his own expense, and the 
Department could not legally use a Government truck for the purpose of 
taking care of the personal needs of an employee. 
"Answer No. 3. As the first two questions under No. 1 are answered 
in the negative, it will not be necessary to consider them in answer 
LO question No. 3. If the. employee, as stated in question 2, is re- 
quired as a part of his duties to make daily trips to town for the mail 
and incidentally stops to take an employee as a passenger on board the 
truck, the employee who rides as a passenger would under no consideration 
be in a duty status in the event of an accident resulting in the injury to 
such employee. 
"Answering your questions specifically, I am of the opinion that you 
are not authorized to grant an employee the use of a Government truck 
for the purposes above mentioned, nor are you authorized to allow an 
employee who is engaged to drive the truck, to stop on his route as a 
regular proposition for the purpose of taking aboard as a BASRenEeh 
an employee in order that he may be transported to his duty station. 

