Comment on FR Doc # 2012-25893

This proposed change seems extraordinarily burdensome for little or no financial benefit. The provision to permit reimbursement of conference hotel rates was established precisely to eliminate the type of detailed analyses proposed in this regulation. I am a scientist for the USDA Forest Service. A few times a year I travel to meetings to present the results of my research to forest managers and other scientists. In some cases the govt. lodging rate is not honored at the conference hotel and I use the conference lodging rate. I am a GS-15 scientist working in a small office. Due to downsizing I have no administrative support for travel arrangements. If as proposed when “In those instances when lodging is not available at the applicable per diem rate, travelers should construct a cost comparison of all associated costs, including round-trip ground transportation, between finding lodging at the applicable per diem rate away from the conference locality and using the actual expense method at the conference locality as prescribed in Subpart D of Part 301-11 of this chapter.” Then I will be personally forced to conduct a search of hotel rates, distances, ground transportation, and other expenses. I guarantee that the cost to the government, including my salary expended on that analysis, will exceed the benefit gained by a slightly lower net rate for lodging and transportation. Although the verbiage states : “Unlike the actual expense provision which mandates that an agency official must approve these requests, there is no such mandate for allowing the use of the conference lodging allowance. To allow agencies to get a firmer grasp on how their travel dollars are used, GSA is proposing to remove the conference lodging allowance provision from the FTR.” there is, in fact, oversight. My supervisor must approve my travel voucher and the govtrip software used to file the travel voucher will specifically flag and identify a lodging expense that exceeds the go