Defense Travel System: Implementation Challenges Remain
Published: 2009-06-30T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: In 1995, the Department of Defense (DOD) began an effort to implement a standard departmentwide travel system--the Defense Travel System (DTS). GAO has made numerous recommendations aimed at improving DOD management, oversight, and implementation of DTS. GAO was asked to (1) assess the actions DOD has taken to implement GAO's prior recommendations; (2) determine the actions DOD has taken to standardize and streamline its travel rules and processes; (3) determine if DOD has identified its legacy travel systems, their operating costs, and which of these systems will be eliminated; and (4) report on DOD's costs to process travel vouchers manually and electronically. To address these objectives, GAO (1) obtained and analyzed relevant travel policies and procedures, and documents related to the operation of DTS and (2) interviewed appropriate DOD and contractor personnel.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: While the department has made progress in improving the efficiency of its travel operations by implementing DTS and revising its processes and policies, unresolved operational issues continue to exist. DOD has taken sufficient action to satisfactorily address 6 of the 14 recommendations GAO made in 2006 pertaining to unused airline tickets, restricted airfares, testing of system interfaces, and streamlining of certain travel processes. More effort is needed to address the remaining 8 related to requirements management and system testing, utilization, premium-class travel, and developing an automated approach to reduce the need for hard-copy receipts to substantiate travel expenses. For example, in the area of requirements management and testing, GAO's analysis found that the display of flight information by DTS is complicated and confusing. This problem continues because DOD has yet to establish DTS flight display requirements that minimize the number of screens DOD travelers must view in selecting a flight. The 1995 DOD Travel Reengineering Report made 22 recommendations to streamline DOD's travel rules and processes. GAO found that DOD had satisfactorily addressed all 22 recommendations. For example, DOD has mandated the use of commercial travel offices (CTO), established a single entity within DOD--the Defense Travel Management Office--to contract with CTOs for travel services, and has begun modifying CTO contracts as they become subject to renewal to standardize the level of services provided. According to DOD officials, except for locations where DTS has not yet been deployed, DTS is used by the military services and all 44 defense agencies and joint commands to process temporary duty (TDY) travel vouchers. The department uses two legacy systems to process (1) TDY travel vouchers at locations where DTS is not yet deployed and (2) civilian and military permanent duty travel vouchers since DTS currently lacks the functionality to process these vouchers. DOD provided us with fiscal year 2008 expenditure data for one system and budget data for the other system. The expenditure/budget data provided by DOD were comparable to the amounts budgeted for these systems for fiscal year 2008. According to DOD officials, these legacy systems will not be eliminated because they provide the capability to process military and civilian permanent duty travel vouchers. Although DTS is expected to provide the capability to process military permanent duty travel vouchers in fiscal year 2010, DOD has not yet decided if civilian permanent duty travel voucher processing will be added to DTS. DOD cost data indicate that it is about 15 times more expensive to process a travel voucher manually--$36.52 manually versus $2.47 electronically. DOD officials acknowledged that the department continues to lack the data needed to ascertain the complete universe of travel vouchers that should be processed through DTS.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: In 1995, the Department of Defense (DOD) embarked upon the daunting  challenge of implementing a standard, departmentwide travel system in  response to a report by the DOD Task Force to Reengineer Travel. The  report pinpointed three principal causes for the inefficiency in DOD’s  travel system: (1) travel policies and programs were focused on  compliance with rigid rules rather than mission performance, (2) travel  practices did not keep pace with travel management improvements  implemented by industry, and (3) the various existing travel systems were  not integrated. To address these concerns, DOD established the Program  Management Office–Defense Travel System (PMO-DTS) to acquire travel  services that would be used departmentwide. The department launched  this program with the goal of replacing existing travel systems with a  single system to more effectively support travel processes and procedures  across its component organizations. The Defense Travel System (DTS) is  envisioned as being the department’s standard end-to-end travel system  and in March 2008 mandated its use at all locations where deployed. The  department estimates that DTS will be deployed at all 9,800 intended  locations during fiscal year 2009.
We have previously reported and testified on the problems encountered by  DOD in implementing DTS and have made numerous recommendations  aimed at improving DOD management, oversight, and implementation of  DTS and related travel policies to make DTS the standard departmentwide  travel system. Following the April 2008 congressional hearing on DTS,  you requested that we (1) assess the actions DOD has taken to implement  our previous recommendations, (2) determine the actions DOD has takento standardize and streamline its travel rules and processes as  recommended by the 1995 Travel Reengineering Report, (3) determine if  DOD has identified its legacy systems, their operating costs, and which  legacy travel systems will be eliminated as well as the time frame for  elimination, and (4) report on DOD’s costs to process travel voucher manually and e lectronically.
To address the first and second objectives, we obtained and analyzed  relevant documentation, such as travel policies and procedures, and  documents related to DTS requirements management and system testing,  to assess the actions taken by the department to address our prior  recommendations and the recommendations in the 1995 Travel  Reengineering Report. To address the third objective, we reviewed and  compared information provided by the Defense Travel Management Office  (DTMO) and the military services on the legacy systems used to manage  their travel operations, associated costs, and the rationale for continued  use of these systems. To address the fourth objective, we reviewed the  methodology used by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS)  to calculate the rates DFAS charged to other DOD activities for processing  a travel voucher manually versus electronically. During the course of the  audit, we interviewed officials from DTMO, the PMO-DTS, the DTS prime  contractor, the military services, the Business Transformation Agency  (BTA), and DFAS to obtain explanations for discrepancies and issues  identified during our work.
We conducted this performance audit from July 2008 through June 2009 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those  standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient,  appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence  obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions  based on our audit objectives. Details on our scope and methodology are  included in appendix I. We requested comments on a draft of this report  from the Secretary of Defense or his designee. We received written  comments from the Deputy Under Secretary (Military Personnel Policy),  which are reprinted in appendix II.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: In September 1993, the National Performance Review recommended an  overhaul of DOD’s temporary duty (TDY) travel system. In response, the  department created the DOD Task Force to Reengineer Travel to examine  the travel process. It found that existing processes were expensive to  administer and neither customer nor mission oriented, resulting in a travel  process that was costly, inefficient, fragmented, and did not support  DOD’s needs. In December 1995, the Under Secretary of Defense for  Acquisition and Technology and the Under Secretary of Defense  (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer issued a memorandum,  “Reengineering Travel Initiative,” which established the PMO-DTS and  tasked it with the responsibility to acquire travel services to be used  departmentwide. Currently, the BTA is responsible for the management  oversight of the PMO-DTS. DTMO is the departmentwide entity  responsible for commercial travel policy, management, and oversight  within the department and reports to the Under Secretary of Defense  (Personnel and Readiness). DTMO’s responsibilities include establishing  strategic direction, setting travel policy, managing the commercial travel  program, and defining and providing the functional requirements to the  PMO-DTS.
section_title: DOD Has Implemented 6 of 14 GAO Recommendations
paragraphs: Our January 2006 and September 2006 reports contained 14  recommendations for improving DOD’s management oversight and  implementation of DTS and related travel policies. On the basis of our  analysis of the documentation provided and discussions with DTMO and  PMO-DTS representatives, the department has taken sufficient action to  implement 6 of the 14 recommendations. While the department has  initiated actions to address the remaining 8, additional efforts are needed.  The 6 closed recommendations pertain to unused airline tickets, use of  restricted airfare, proper testing of system interfaces, and streamlining of  certain travel processes, such as approving travel vouchers.
The 8 open recommendations relate to requirements management and  system testing, DTS utilization, premium-class travel, and developing an  approach that will permit the use of automated methods to reduce the  need for hard-copy receipts to substantiate travel expenses. Appendix III  offers additional details on DOD’s efforts to implement the 14  recommendations.
Highlighted below are two examples—testing of system interfaces and use  of restricted airfare—where DOD has taken sufficient action to close our  recommendations.
Testing of system interfaces. In our January 2006 report, we noted that  while the department had developed and implemented interfaces with 36  systems, going forward, the testing of system interfaces would continue to  be a challenge. We recommended that the PMO-DTS test new or modified  system interfaces to ensure that the intended functionality is operating  properly. To address our recommendation, the PMO-DTS engaged the  DFAS Enterprise Level Test Group as an independent verification and  validation group in 2006 to provide an objective perspective of the  reliability of the system interface testing being performed by the  contractor. We reviewed the testing documentation, such as the test plan,  test scripts, and test cases, related to the DTS system interface with the  Navy Enterprise Resource Planning system, and found that the  documentation was sufficient for ensuring that interfaces between  systems operated as intended. DOD’s use of an independent verification  and validation group meets the intent of our recommendation.
Use of restricted airfares. In our January 2006 report, we recommended  that the PMO-DTS determine the feasibility of using restricted airfares  where cost effective. We reported that the system requirement stipulated  that DTS is to display only unrestricted airfares. As noted in that report,  other airfares generally referred to as restricted airfares may, in some  cases, be less expensive than a given General Services Administration  (GSA) city-pair fare and other unrestricted airfares. However, as the name  implies, restricted airfares contain certain limitations. We recommended  that the PMO-DTS determine the feasibility of using restricted airfares  where cost effective. To address our recommendation, DTMO contracted  with the Logistics Management Institute to conduct a study on the use of  restricted airfares. The study, completed in September 2008, determined  that the use of restricted airfares was feasible and presented DOD  management with two options for implementing this functionality into  DTS. The department’s actions are fully responsive to our  recommendation for the determination of feasibility. Highlighted below  are examples where further actions are needed to fully address our  recommendations.
Requirements management processes. Our January 2006 and  September 2006 reports noted that DTS did not display flight information  in a manner that facilitated a traveler’s compliance with DOD travel  regulations. For example, we found that not all GSA city-pair flights were  included in the display of flights provided to the traveler. As a result,  travelers may not consistently select flights that are most cost  advantageous to the government. We recommended that DOD consider  simplifying the display of flight information in DTS. The intent of this  recommendation was to improve usability by reducing the amount of user  effort required to identify flights that matched the traveler’s schedule in  order to meet mission needs. Our current analysis found that DTS’s flight  displays have not been simplified. More specifically, the DOD traveler may  have to review at least four of the five separate flight display screens to  identify the flight that is best suited to his or her needs. DTS’s flight  displays could be simplified by grouping the flights into two categories— GSA and commercial. Displaying all of the GSA flights on one display  screen would facilitate selection of the lowest fare. If a GSA city-pair fare  was not available, the traveler could view a single display screen of  commercial flights to identify and select a commercial flight with the  lowest available airfare that meets mission needs.
DTS testing. In January 2006 and September 2006, we reported that the  system testing performed did not provide reasonable assurance that DTS  was displaying the proper flights and airfares. We also reported that DOD  did not adequately document the testing performed to ensure DTS was  functioning properly. We recommended that the PMO-DTS effectively  implement the disciplined processes necessary to provide reasonable  assurance that (1) requirements are properly documented and                   (2) requirements are adequately tested. Throughout our review, we have  found that while DOD has stated that it has established processes,  consistent with industry practices, to ensure that (1) DTS requirements are  valid, clearly stated, and properly documented and tested; and (2) testing  is properly documented, those processes have not been effectively  implemented. For example, our January 2009 analysis of selected DTS  requirements related to flight displays and airfares found that the testing  process did not fully address our previously reported problems. The  problems we found generally related to missing documentation to support  tests performed or the test performed focused on limited aspects of the  requirement and did not provide sufficient evidence that the requirement  was adequately tested.
Our analysis found that DOD did not adequately test the DTS requirement  that travelers provide a justification for any deviation from DOD travel  policies. For example, DOD policy requires the traveler to select the  lowest cost compact rental car. However, if the traveler later changes this  selection to the lowest cost car within another model category (mid-size),  the justification box will not appear for the approving official to review.  The underlying control weakness is that the appearance of the justification  box is not predicated on whether the last selected choice meets the  department’s travel policy requirements. PMO-DTS officials were not  aware of this problem until we brought it to their attention.
We also found that DOD did not adequately test the DTS requirement to  only display flights that comply with the requirements of the Fly America  Act, which stipulates that travel must be on U.S. carriers when available.  This testing failure places the traveler who purchases a ticket or the  individual authorizing, certifying, or disbursing DOD ticket payments  directly through a centrally billed account, at unnecessary risk of being  personally liable for the cost of the ticket. Specifically, our analysis of  November 2008 flight display data identified the following instances in  which DTS displayed flights that did not meet the requirements of the Fly  America Act:    9 out of 25 flights DTS displayed for travel from Washington Dulles Airport  to Harare, Zimbabwe;    4 out of 10 flights from Washington Dulles Airport to Islamabad, Pakistan;    3 out of 15 flights from Washington Dulles Airport to Sana’a, Yemen.
Our analysis of the same flight origins and destinations in March 2009  found that the problem continues. On April 9, 2009, DTMO’s Commercial  Travel Division Chief concurred with our assessment that DTS’s display of  flights could result in the traveler selecting a flight that was not in  compliance with the requirements of the Fly America Act. As a result, the  traveler is at unnecessary risk of being held personally liable for the cost  of the airfare.
In addition, one requirement indicated that DTS should not allow a  traveler to select flight departure or arrival dates that were outside the  established itinerary trip dates. Our review of DOD’s testing of this  requirement showed that only three of the six boundary conditions needed  to fully test this requirement had been tested. Neither DOD nor its  contractor could provide documentation supporting testing for the day  after the traveler’s departure date, the day before the arrival date, and the  day after the arrival date. Based on our analysis, DOD does not have  assurance that this requirement was adequately tested because of a lack of  documentation.
DTS utilization. Our September 2006 report pointed out that the  department did not have the quantitative metrics to measure the extent to  which employees used DTS at locations where the system was deployed.  We recommended that the department establish a process by which the  military services develop and use quantitative data from DTS and their  individual legacy systems to clearly identify the total universe of DTS- eligible transactions on a monthly basis. The department has yet to  establish a process to identify the universe of DTS-eligible transactions,  which is needed to effectively measure DTS usage. Until the department  has reasonable quantitative metrics to measure and reliably report on the  extent to which DTS is being used, the department’s ability to ensure  compliance with its mandate to use DTS and to provide consistent and  accurate DTS utilization data to the Congress is diminished.
Premium-class travel. We reported in January 2006 that the commercial  travel offices (CTO) were not adhering to the department’s policy  restricting the use of premium-class travel and not issuing premium-class  tickets without proper authorization. Because a premium-class ticket can  cost the government thousands of dollars more than a coach-class ticket,  unauthorized premium-class travel can result in millions of dollars in  unnecessary travel costs annually. We recommended that the department  take action to ensure that CTOs adhere to the department’s policy on the  use of premium-class travel. To address our recommendation, in October  2007, DTMO started using a Web-based management tool that generates  monthly reports to assess compliance with DOD’s premium-class travel  policy. DTMO also receives and reviews monthly reports from CTOs on  premium-class travel. The CTO reports include a list of the premium-class  travel tickets issued and the information necessary to identify the traveler  and the trip taken.
While DTMO has taken steps to identify premium-class travel, its actions  do not address our concerns that such travel be properly authorized. We  requested and reviewed one CTO’s December 2008 monthly premium-class  report and determined that 12 premium-class tickets were issued for the  month. Based upon our review of documentation provided by DTMO to  determine whether these tickets complied with DOD’s travel policy on  premium-class travel, we found  two tickets were properly justified and authorized;  two tickets were for DOD contractors and therefore should not have been  on the report;  four tickets were issued without the proper justification and authorization;  the CTO has initiated actions to reimburse DOD for the cost of the  difference between any premium-class airfare and the lowest applicable  airfare; and  four tickets were issued without justification and authorization, on the  basis of our review of DOD travel regulations. However, based on our  interpretation of federal travel regulations, they do not meet the definition  of premium-class as defined by federal travel regulations because they  were the lowest available fare and, therefore, would not require  justification and authorization.
Automating hard copy receipts. In January 2006, we reported that DOD  might be able to change its travel policy, and reduce the number of  receipts required, and the associated administrative burden without  adversely affecting its ability to ensure a claim is proper. The Internal  Revenue Service (IRS) has established criteria for determining whether  travel reimbursements are taxable to an employee and the documentation  required to substantiate travel expenses. As a result, any changes to DOD’s  travel policies regarding travel reimbursement—including evaluating  methods that meet IRS’s receipt requirements—should be done in  consultation with IRS. We recommended that the department work with  IRS in developing an approach that would permit the use of automated  methods to reduce the need for hard-copy receipts while satisfying the  department’s and IRS’s requirements to substantiate travel expenses. To  its credit, the department has had one meeting with the IRS to obtain an  understanding of IRS revenue rulings regarding travel receipts and to  discuss the possible use of travel card statements in lieu of travel receipts.  However, the department has not developed or presented to the IRS a  conceptual approach for how travel card data and other information could  be used to address IRS concerns regarding the use of electronic data to  substantiate travel expenses. Since GSA is the lead agency for  promulgating travel policy for the federal government, DOD will need to  work with both GSA and IRS to implement the needed changes.
section_title: DOD Has Implemented the 22 Recommendations Made in the 1995 Travel Reengineering Report
paragraphs: The 1995 DOD Travel Reengineering Report included 22 recommendations  for reengineering DOD’s TDY travel rules and processes and automating  these processes by implementing an integrated DOD travel system. On the  basis of our analysis of documentation provided and discussions with  DTMO and PMO-DTS representatives, the department has taken sufficient  action to address all of these recommendations.
Appendix IV offers additional details on DOD’s efforts to implement the 22  recommendations.
Highlighted below are two examples—mandated use of CTOs in providing  travel services and the availability of 24-hour CTO support to DOD  travelers—where DOD has taken sufficient action to close the  recommendations.
Mandated use of CTOs. The 1995 report noted that DOD’s cumbersome,  complex, and fragmented travel operations were not customer or mission  oriented and the report recommended that DOD mandate the use of CTOs  for DOD travel services. To address this recommendation, the  department updated its travel regulations to mandate the use of CTOs for  making DOD travel arrangements and identified DTMO as the  department’s single travel procurement and contract manager. In addition,  DTMO is modifying CTO contract language, as CTO contracts become  subject to renegotiation and renewal, to standardize the level of services  CTOs provide DOD travelers.
Twenty-four hour CTO support. The 1995 report noted that if travelers  need to change accommodations during nonbusiness hours, they are often  required to make the changes themselves. To provide DOD travelers with  travel support consistent with services provided in the private sector, and  to ensure compliance with DOD policy, the report recommended that all  changes in accommodations be made through CTO 24-hour 800 service  phone numbers. To address this recommendation, the department requires  all CTO contracts to include a provision to support DOD travelers via toll- free numbers or collect call.
section_title: DOD Entities Use DTS and Legacy Systems to Process Travel Vouchers
paragraphs: According to DOD officials, except for locations where DTS has not yet  been deployed, such as the Army Corps of Engineers and some locations  within the military services, DTS is used by the military services and all    44 defense agencies and joint commands to process TDY travel vouchers.  (Appendix V offers a list of the 44 defense agencies and joint commands.)  The department uses two legacy systems to process (1) TDY travel  vouchers at locations where DTS is not yet deployed and (2) civilian and  military permanent duty travel vouchers since DTS currently lacks the  functionality to process these vouchers (see table 1). According to DOD  officials, the department should complete its efforts to add military  permanent duty travel functionality to DTS in fiscal year 2010. A decision  on whether civilian permanent duty travel will be added to DTS has not yet  been made. In response to our request for operating costs associated with  these systems, DOD officials provided us with fiscal year 2008 expenditure  data for one system and budget data for the other system. The  expenditure/budget data provided by DOD are comparable with the fiscal  year 2008 amounts identified in the department’s fiscal year 2008  Information Technology Budget request for these two systems.
According to DOD officials, these legacy systems will not be eliminated  because they provide the capability to process civilian permanent duty  travel vouchers. DOD officials stated that this capability is not currently  within DTS and it is uncertain whether it will be added.
section_title: Electronic Processing of Travel Vouchers Is Significantly Less Expensive Than Manual Processing
paragraphs: For fiscal year 2009, DFAS estimates it will charge DOD components an  average of $2.47 for travel vouchers processed electronically and $36.52  for travel vouchers processed manually. It is about 15 times less expensive  to process a travel voucher electronically versus manually. In our review  of DOD’s calculation of costs for travel voucher processing, we found an  error in the DFAS rate determination that resulted in an over allocation of  DFAS general and administrative cost to DFAS’s travel voucher processing  activities. DFAS personnel, unaware of the error until our review,  confirmed that the computation of the fiscal year 2009 rates was  inaccurate and indicated that the miscalculation occurred as a result of a  misinterpretation of DFAS guidance. The DFAS official further stated   to  that changes would be made to the fiscal year 2010 rate computation accurately allocate the general and administrative costs among DFAS’s  various accounting and finance operations. The cost figures for fiscal year  2010 reflect the corrected rates.
DOD officials acknowledged that the department continues to lack the  data needed to ascertain the complete universe of travel vouchers that  should be processed through DTS. This lack of data adversely affects the  reliability of DTS utilization reports and the department’s ability to identify  locations where DTS is deployed but not fully utilized. Given that the Army  is DFAS’s largest customer of manually processed travel vouchers, DFAS  officials told us that the Army would benefit most from increased  electronic voucher processing. The department reported that in fiscal year  2008, the Army had processed more than 1.5 million vouchers, about        1.1 million through DTS. However, DOD cannot determine how many of  the remaining 400,000 vouchers were from locations where DTS was  already available but the offices continued processing the vouchers  manually. As a result, the department cannot ascertain the total universe  of travel vouchers that are eligible to be processed through DTS and the  savings that could be realized through electronic processing of those  vouchers. Continued use of manual processing of TDY travel vouchers  through legacy systems is inefficient because the department is paying for  a service that can be provided at much lower cost. DFAS provides only  limited manual travel voucher processing for the Navy and the Air Force.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: DOD has made progress in addressing our prior recommendations  regarding the implementation of DTS as well as those in the 1995 DOD  Travel Reengineering Report that were intended to streamline DOD’s  travel operations. Additional management attention is needed to ensure  that DTS delivers its intended functionality and meets customers’ needs.  Accordingly, we reaffirm our prior recommendations related to the  improvements needed to effectively implement DTS so that it can become  the department’s standard travel system. Electronic processing of travel  vouchers through DTS is far less expensive than manual processing  through legacy systems. Thus, it is important for the department to  continue its efforts to make DTS its standardized system for processing  travel vouchers.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We received written comments on a draft of this report from the Deputy  Under Secretary (Military Personnel Policy), which are reprinted in  appendix II. In commenting on the report, the Deputy Under Secretary  stated that the DTS program overall is a success story and that system  usage and customer satisfaction have increased since 2006. The  department acknowledges that there is still room for improvement and  stated that DOD is committed to continued progress. The department  commented that reiteration of the 14 previous recommendations creates  an inaccurate impression because it believes it has taken sufficient action  to address all but 2 of our recommendations. However, we clearly state in  the report that the department satisfactorily addressed 6 of our 14  recommendations; therefore, we were reiterating only the remaining           8 recommendations that require additional action to address.
For the two recommendations the department acknowledged that it had  not yet addressed, DOD identified specific actions it has under way or  planned to take to address our concerns regarding DTS requirements  management and testing. For example, the department noted that        PMO-DTS is currently reviewing software test processes with the prime  contractor to ensure that proper documentation and test artifacts are  maintained. The department also noted that it intended to correct the  System Problem Reports to address any deficiencies that preclude DOD  from meeting the requirements of the Fly America Act.
Regarding the remaining six open recommendations relating to premium- class travel, DTS utilization, simplification of flight displays, and  developing an approach that will permit the use of automated methods to  reduce the need for hard-copy receipts to substantiate travel expenses,  DOD stated that it believed it had taken sufficient action to address these  recommendations. Specifically, the department is of the opinion that the  recommendation related to premium-class travel should be considered  closed. DOD noted that it has enacted several measures to strengthen the  control over premium-class travel, such as including a requirement in CTO  contracts that premium-class tickets not be issued unless there is a  properly signed or otherwise properly authenticated travel authorization.  Additionally, DOD noted the use of a Web-based management tool by the  military services and defense agencies to document and report premium- class approvals. We do not agree that the department’s actions fully  addressed our concerns. As noted in the report, despite the  implementation of these measures, we identified four premium-class  tickets, at one location for 1 month, that were improperly issued by the  CTO. The DTMO was not aware of this improper issuance until we brought  it to DTMO’s attention. The fact remains that CTOs continue to issue  premium-class tickets that have not been properly justified and  authorized, thereby raising concerns about the effectiveness of the  controls the department has put in place.
Three of the eight open recommendations relate to the department’s  actions taken to develop and report metrics on its utilization of DTS. In its  comments, DOD noted that the military services and defense agencies  report actual non-DTS travel voucher counts and that DTMO’s calculations  of DTS utilization take into account travel vouchers that are and are not  processed by DTS. DOD acknowledged that these computations are not  completely accurate and stated that the modifications to legacy systems  that would be needed to achieve greater accuracy would require a  significant investment of time and money. The department stated that  given the 70 percent DTS usage rate it has calculated for DTS through the  second quarter of fiscal year 2009, this additional cost is not justified. We  disagree with the department’s assessment that these recommendations  should be closed. Our recommendations in this area were intended to  improve the department’s metrics for measuring and reporting DTS usage  and to facilitate the identification of locations that were not fully utilizing  DTS. The department could not ascertain the complete universe of travel  vouchers that should be processed through DTS. Without a process to  identify TDY vouchers by location that are processed outside DTS, DOD is  hindered in its ability to (1) identify the locations responsible for those  travel vouchers and identify and address issues that undermine DTS usage,  (2) reliably measure and report DTS usage, and (3) ensure that DTS is the  departmentwide standard travel system.
With respect to our prior recommendation on requirements management  as it relates to the simplification of the display of flights, the department  believes that sufficient action has been taken to address this  recommendation. DOD noted in its comments that the requirements were  specifically written to display airfare in the five-tab format to provide flight  information in accordance with the order of precedence contained in the  current policy. The department also noted that travelers do not have  access to each of the five tabs, but rather DTS presents the traveler with  only the available flights based on policy. We do not consider this  recommendation closed. We found, on the basis of our testing of this  requirement, the traveler does have access to at least four of the five tabs  and must review each to identify the flight that is best suited to his or her  needs. In addition, the use of multiple flight display screens can result in  the display of flights occurring within the same travel schedule time period  that are significantly more expensive than the available GSA flights.  Simplifying the flight displays to two tabs or categories—GSA and  commercial—would facilitate the traveler’s identification and selection of  flights with the lowest cost airfare by eliminating the display of higher cost  flights within the same travel schedule time period. The department  recognized the merit of our recommendation by stating in its comments  that it intended to review the feasibility of grouping the flights into two  categories or tabs as part of its overall effort to improve the usability of  DTS.
DOD did not assert that sufficient action had been taken in its entirety to  address our recommendation that the department develop an approach  that uses automated methods to reduce the need for hard copy receipts.  Rather, DOD noted that, because this recommendation has  governmentwide impact, GSA—the agency responsible for promulgating  travel policy for the entire federal government—is the more appropriate  agency to lead this effort. We recognize that GSA is the lead agency for  promulgating travel policy for the federal government. However, the intent  of our recommendation was that given the size of DOD’s travel operations  and the department’s goal to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of  its business operations, we believe DOD should work with GSA and the  IRS to identify and implement acceptable changes. To date, DOD has not  developed or presented to the IRS or GSA a conceptual approach that  identifies the information that would be needed and the extent to which  this information is available to address this recommendation while  adhering to the IRS’s requirements. DOD needs to conduct research to  understand what data is available, either from industry providers or its  systems (including the travel card data), that could be used to meet IRS’s  requirements. This recommendation was not intended to assess simply the  extent to which credit card data could be used to substantiate travel  expenses, but also for DOD to understand the data and the internal control  requirements that should be included in the functionality of relevant  systems, such as DTS, to ensure compliance with IRS requirements  regarding documentation of actual travel expenses.
DOD also provided technical comments on a draft of this report that we  have incorporated throughout the report, as appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Defense; the Under  Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness; the Director, Defense  Business Transformation Agency; the Director, the Defense Travel  Management Office; the Director, Program Management Office-Defense  Travel System; the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management  and Comptroller); the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Financial  Management and Comptroller); the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Air  Force for Financial Management; and the Director, Defense Finance and  Accounting Service. The report also is available at no charge on the GAO  Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
Please contact Asif A. Khan at (202) 512-9095 or khana@gao.gov, or  Nabajyoti Barkakati at (202) 512-4499 or barkakatin@gao.gov, if you or  your staffs have questions on matters discussed in this report. Contact   points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may  be found on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are  listed in appendix VI.
section_title: Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: To determine the status of the Department of Defense’s (DOD) efforts to  address our 14 recommendations and those made in the 1995 Task Force  Report to streamline the department’s travel rules and processes, we  obtained and analyzed relevant documentation, such as travel policies and  procedures, documents related to the Defense Travel System (DTS)  requirements management and system testing, and monthly premium-class  travel reports to assess the actions taken, under way, or planned by the  department to address these recommendations. To determine the specific  actions taken related to our previous recommendations on requirements  management and system testing, we nonstatistically selected and analyzed  209 requirements by reviewing relevant documentation to determine  whether the requirements had been adequately tested. The requirements  selected for review related primarily to the display of flight information for  travelers—since that was an area of concern in our prior work.
Regarding premium-class travel, we requested and reviewed one  Commercial Travel Office’s December 2008 monthly premium-class report  and determined that 12 premium-class tickets were issued for the month.  We requested and reviewed documentation from the Defense Travel  Management Office (DTMO) regarding the justification of these premium- class tickets to determine whether these tickets complied with DOD’s  travel policy regarding premium-class travel. We met with representatives  of DTMO, the Program Management Office-Defense Travel System, and  the prime contractor and travel management representatives of the  military services to obtain clarification and explanations of actions taken,  under way, or planned by the department in response to our  recommendations.
To determine if DOD has identified its legacy systems, their operating  costs, and which legacy travel systems will be eliminated as well as the  time frame for elimination, we reviewed and compared information  provided by DTMO and the military services’ regarding the legacy systems  used to manage their travel operations, associated costs, and the rationale  for continued use of these systems. We met with representatives of DTMO  and the military services to (1) discuss discrepancies or omissions in the  information provided identifying the legacy systems and their operating  costs, and (2) obtain the rationale for why these systems would not be  eliminated.
To analyze DOD’s costs to process travel vouchers manually and  electronically, we reviewed the methodology used by the Defense Finance  and Accounting Service (DFAS) to calculate the rates it charged other  DOD activities and assessed the reasonableness of DOD’s cost estimates.  During the course of the audit, we interviewed DFAS officials to obtain an  understanding of the methodology and an explanation for the error we  identified in the rate calculation.
We conducted this performance audit from July 2008 through June 2009, in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those  standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient,  appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence  obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions  based on our audit objectives.
We conducted our work at the offices of the Defense Travel Management  Office, the Business Transformation Agency, the Program Management  Office - Defense Travel System, the Defense Travel System prime  contractor, the military services, and the Defense Finance and Accounting  Service–Indianapolis. We requested comments on a draft of this report  from the Secretary of Defense or his designee. We received written  comments from the Deputy Under Secretary (Military Personnel Policy),  which are reprinted in appendix II.
section_title: Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense
section_title: Appendix III: Status of DOD’s Actions on Previous GAO Recommendations on the Defense Travel System
paragraphs: Appendix III: Status of DOD’s Actions on  Previous GAO Recommendations on the  Defense Travel System DOD action taken to address the recommendation  1. Secretary of Defense should direct the  Project Management Office-Defense Travel  System (PMO-DTS) to effectively implement  the disciplined processes necessary to provide  reasonable assurance that (1) requirements  are properly documented and (2) requirements  are adequately tested.
DOD stated that it has established processes, consistent with  best practices, to ensure that (1) DTS requirements are valid,  clearly stated, and properly documented and tested; and   (2) testing is properly documented; however, we found that  those processes have not been effectively implemented. For  example, our January 2009 analysis of selected DTS  requirements related to flight display and airfares found that  the DTS testing process still did not fully address our  previously reported problems. The problems we found  generally related to missing documentation or the test  performed focused on limited aspects of the requirement and  did not provide sufficient evidence that the requirement was  adequately tested using best practices. Because of these  continuing problems, we found that DTS was not in  compliance with the requirements of the Fly America Act and  as a result, the traveler is at unnecessary risk of being held  personally liable for the cost of the airfare.
2. Secretary of Defense should direct the  PMO-DTS to properly test new or modified  system interfaces so that the intended  functionality is properly operating prior to a  software update being provided to DTS users.
To address our recommendation, the PMO-DTS engaged the  Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) Enterprise  Level Test Group as an independent verification and  validation group in 2006 to provide an objective perspective  of the reliability of the contractor-performed system interface  testing. We reviewed the testing documentation, such as the  test plan, test scripts, and test cases, related to the DTS  system interface for the Navy Enterprise Resource Planning  system. We found that the documentation was consistent with  best practices and adequate for ensuring that interfaces  between systems operated as intended.
3. Secretary of Defense should direct the  PMO-DTS to require that all Commercial  Travel Offices (CTO) adhere to the  department’s policy on the use of premium- class travel, even in those instances where it  is listed as the only available airfare.
In October 2007, the Defense Travel Management Office  (DTMO) started utilizing a Web-based management tool that  generates monthly reports to assess compliance with DOD’s  premium-class travel policy. DTMO also receives and reviews  monthly reports from CTOs on premium-class travel. The  CTO reports include the total number of premium-class  tickets issued each month for each military service and  defense agency, the identification of the traveler,  authorization numbers, airline and ticket numbers, fare basis,  date of travel, and cost of the original ticket. While DTMO has  taken steps to identify premium-class travel, its actions do not  address our concerns that such travel be properly authorized.  Our analysis of one CTO’s December 2008 monthly  premium-class report identified premium-class travel that was  not authorized. Specifically, we identified four premium-class  tickets that were issued without the proper justification and  authorization. The CTO has initiated actions to reimburse  DOD for the cost of the difference between the premium- class airfare and the lowest applicable airfare (total of about  $4,218).
DOD action taken to address the recommendation  4. Secretary of Defense should direct the  Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force,  as well as the heads of all DOD agencies, to  reemphasize that travelers are to justify  exceptions from department policy and the  importance of the authorizing officials not  approving any travel authorization in which  exceptions are not properly justified.
The department has updated Appendix O—Temporary Duty  (TDY) Travel Allowances of the Joint Travel Regulations that  provide specific guidance on the various types of travel  expenses that are authorized and those expenses that are  not authorized. Appendix O identifies the types of exceptions  from department policy for which travelers must provide  justification and obtain approval from the authorizing official  (AO). For example, Appendix O guidance states that the  traveler must use coach-class for all official travel, unless  premium-class accommodations are justified and approved  prior to travel by the appropriate AO. There are separate  sections of the appendix that are applicable to the traveler  and the AO. Additionally, DTMO has put on the DTS Web site  a document, entitled “Authorizing Official Checklist and  Helpful Tips,” which can be used when reviewing the  justification before authorizing an expense or approving a  voucher.
5. Secretary of Defense should direct the  Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force,  as well as the heads of all DOD agencies, to  routinely monitor, such as on a quarterly basis,  information on the number and cost of  processing travel vouchers outside of DTS  and initiate action to eliminate funding for  legacy systems, where applicable.
DOD officials acknowledged that the department does not  know the total number of manual travel vouchers that are  processed by DFAS that should be processed through DTS.  As a result, the department cannot ascertain the total  universe of travel vouchers that are eligible to be processed  through DTS or the savings that could be realized through  electronic travel voucher processing.
6. Secretary of Defense should direct the  PMO-DTS to develop and implement the  means to automate the approval of changes to  authorized travel expenses where possible.
Functionality has been added to DTS to facilitate the  automatic approval of changes to authorized estimated  expenses where such changes are consistent with sound  internal controls and DOD policy.
7. Secretary of Defense should direct the  PMO-DTS to consider the viability of using  commercial databases to identify unused  airline tickets, for which reimbursement should  be obtained and help improve the assurance  that the actual travel taken was consistent with  the information shown on the travel voucher.
The intent of this recommendation was to establish a process  to identify and obtain reimbursement for unused airline  tickets. Beginning in 2007, as CTO contracts came up for  renewal, DTMO included a requirement in new CTO contracts  that the CTO identify and cancel unused tickets 30 days after  the planned trip date and initiate a refund request for the  cancelled unused tickets. DTMO’s effort to include this  requirement in all CTO contracts is scheduled to be  completed by June 2009.
8. Secretary of Defense should direct the  PMO-DTS to consider simplifying the display  of airfares in DTS.
The intent of this recommendation was to improve usability by  reducing the amount of user effort required to identify flights  that matched the traveler’s schedule in order to meet mission  needs. However, we found that a traveler must access at  least four of the five flight display screens. DTS’s flight  displays could be simplified by grouping the flights into two  categories—GSA and commercial. Displaying all of the GSA  flights on one display screen would facilitate selection of the  lowest fare. If a GSA city-pair fare was not available, the  traveler could view a single display screen of commercial  flights to identify and select a commercial flight with the  lowest available airfare that meets mission needs.
DOD action taken to address the recommendation  9. Secretary of Defense should direct the  PMO-DTS to determine the feasibility of  utilizing restricted airfares, where cost  effective.
In 2007, DTMO contracted with the Logistics Management  Institute to conduct a study on the use of restricted airfares.  The study, completed in September 2008, determined that  the use of restricted airfares was feasible and presented DOD  management with two options for implementing this  functionality into DTS. The two options recommended by the  study were to either add (1) a restricted airfare screen to  DTS’s flight display screen, which would include embedded  controls requiring approval of restricted airfare flights prior to  booking the reservation; or (2) a preapproval option for  restricted airfares, and allow instant booking of restricted  airfares in DTS. As of May 2009, DOD had not selected an  option.
10. Secretary of Defense should direct the  PMO-DTS to work with the Internal Revenue  Service (IRS) to develop an approach that will  permit the use of automated methods to  reduce the need for hard copy receipts to  satisfy requirements to substantiate travel  expenses.
DOD has had one meeting with the IRS to obtain an  understanding of IRS revenue rulings regarding travel  receipts and to discuss the possible use of travel card  statements in lieu of travel receipts. However, the department  has not developed or presented to the IRS a conceptual  approach for how travel card data and other information could  be used to address IRS concerns regarding the use of  electronic data to substantiate travel expenses. Since GSA is  the lead agency for promulgating travel policy for the federal  government DOD will need to work with both GSA and IRS to  implement the needed changes.
DOD Business Transformation: Defense Travel System Continues to Face Implementation  Challenges, GAO-06-18 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 18, 2006).
DOD action taken to address the recommendation  1. The Secretary of Defense should direct the  Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and  Readiness) (P&R) and the Director, Business  Transformation Agency (BTA), to jointly  evaluate the cost effectiveness of the Navy  continuing with the CTO management fee  structure versus adopting the revised CTO fee  structure, once the new contracts have been  awarded.
As DTMO renegotiates CTO contracts for Navy travel  services, DTMO is requiring bid proposals to include (1) a  management fee structure, which is a flat rate regardless of  CTO involvement, and (2) a CTO fee structure, which is  transaction based. According to DTMO officials, the bid  proposals will be evaluated to identify the most cost-effective  fee structure. This meets the intent of our recommendation.
2. The Secretary of Defense should direct the  Under Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the  Director, BTA, to jointly develop a process by  which the military services develop and use  quantitative data from DTS and their  individual legacy systems to clearly identify  the total universe of DTS-eligible transactions  on a monthly basis. At a minimum, these data  should be used to update the DTS Voucher  Analysis Model to report DTS actual utilization  rates.
DOD officials acknowledged that the department does not  know the total number of manual travel vouchers that are  processed by DFAS that should be processed through DTS.  As a result, the department cannot ascertain the total universe  of travel vouchers that are eligible for DTS processing or the  savings that could be realized through electronic travel  voucher processing.
3. The Secretary of Defense should direct the  Under Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the  Director, BTA, to jointly require the PMO-DTS  to provide a periodic report on the utilization  of DTS to the Under Secretary of Defense  (P&R) and the Director, BTA, once accurate  data are available. The report should continue  until the department has reasonable  assurance that DTS is operating properly at  all intended locations. The report should  identify at a minimum (1) the number of  defense locations at which DTS has been  deployed, (2) the extent of DTS utilization at  these sites, (3) steps taken or to be taken by  the department to improve DTS utilization,  and (4) any continuing problems in the  implementation and utilization of DTS.
The fiscal year 2007 John Warner National Defense  Authorization Act directed DOD to provide semiannual reports  to the Congress for two years starting in 2007. The  requirements of the act are consistent with our  recommendations. The department submitted its first  semiannual report to the Congress in September 2007 and its  final semiannual report in December 2008. However, DOD  continues to lack the data needed to ascertain the complete  universe of travel vouchers that should be processed through  DTS. This lack of data adversely affects the reliability of DTS  utilization reports and the department’s ability to identify  locations where DTS is deployed but not fully utilized.
DOD action taken to address the recommendation  4. The Secretary of Defense should direct the  Under Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the  Director, BTA, to jointly resolve  inconsistencies in DTS requirements, such as  the 25 flight display, by properly defining the  (1) functionality needed and (2) business  rules necessary to properly implement the  needed functionality.
The intent of this recommendation was to ensure that the  basis of a requirement was valid and the resulting functionality  would be consistent with DOD travel regulations. DOD stated  that it has established processes, consistent with best  practices, to ensure that (1) DTS requirements are valid,  clearly stated, and properly documented and tested; and (2)  testing is properly documented; however, we found that those  processes have not been effectively implemented. For  example, we found that DOD did not implement the  disciplined requirements management processes to achieve  the intent of this recommendation. For example, we found that  DOD travelers had to access at least four of the five flight  display screens to identify the flight that best suited his or her  needs. As a result, the traveler may not have selected the  flight that was the most cost advantageous to the government.
Defense Travel System: Reported Savings Questionable and Implementation Challenges Remain,  GAO-06-980 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 26, 2006).
section_title: Appendix IV: Status of DOD’s Actions to Address Recommendations of the January 1995 Travel Reengineering Report
paragraphs: Appendix IV: Status of DOD’s Actions to  Address Recommendations of the January  1995 Travel Reengineering Report DOD action taken to address the recommendation  1. The Task Force recommended creating three  broad categories of mission travel: deployment,  training, and “business.”
The department has updated the Appendix O— Temporary Duty (TDY) Travel Allowances of the Joint  Travel Regulation—to include these three broad  categories of travel.
2. The Task Force recommended that entitlements  for subsistence be structured on a lodging-plus per  diem method.
The intent of this recommendation was to adopt a  “Lodging-Plus” per diem method of reimbursing  travelers for subsistence expenses incurred. Appendix  O of the Joint Federal Travel Regulations and the  Joint Travel Regulations requires that the “Lodgings- Plus” computation method be used to reimburse TDY  living expenses. A traveler is paid the actual lodging  cost up to a limit, plus a set amount for meals and  incidental expenses—commonly referred to as per  diem.
3. The Task Force recommended eliminating the  various types of TDY travel orders and order  formats used for TDY travel, and using a modified  version of the itinerary prepared by the  commercial travel office in its place.
The intent of this recommendation was to permit  single entry of data, so that information required for  both the orders and voucher would not have to be  entered repeatedly on different forms only to satisfy  the internal operations of existing process owners.  DTS has been designed to create a single electronic  trip record for all official travel authorizations,  modifications, and payment decisions. The trip record  is the single document that includes the travel  authorization and fund cite, cost estimate, itinerary,  and updates to the itinerary made during the trip, and  also serves as the expense report when the traveler  returns.
4. The Task Force recommended that funds  control responsibility must be delegated to the  lowest practical level, with authority to obligate  funds given to the commander or supervisor  approving travel consistent with Operation and  Maintenance (or other funding) controls.
The intent of this recommendation was to delegate the  approval of travel vouchers to the lowest practical  level, (i.e., the traveler’s supervisor or authorizing  officer) and reduce the number of approving officials.  Appendix O of the Joint Federal Travel Regulations  and the Financial Management Regulation delegates  approval authority to the lowest practical level. The  approval authority is implemented via DTS’s “routing  list” functionality. Through DTS, the military service or  defense agency can centrally control the approval  authority levels and minimize the number of approving  officials involved.
5. The Task Force recommended that the  accounting for travel be simplified and made more  accurate by funding all or as much travel as  possible at the organizational level and using one  element of expense—TDY.
The intent of this recommendation was to reduce the  accounting information needed—commonly referred to  as the line of accounting. DOD has had a policy in  place since 1997 requiring the use of a single line of  accounting, but recognizes that in all cases this may  not be practical, especially when travel crosses fiscal  years.
DOD action taken to address the recommendation  6. The Task Force recommended that use of  government quarters and dining facilities not be  mandated.
The intent of this recommendation was to allow a DOD  civilian the option of using quarters and dining facilities  other than those of the military/government while on  TDY. According to Appendix O of the Joint Federal  Travel Regulations, military personnel are still required  to check the availability of government quarters before  using commercial quarters and dining facilities when  assigned to a military installation. If government  quarters and dining facilities are available, or if the  military member chooses to use other lodgings or  dining as a personal choice, reimbursement is limited  to the cost of government quarters or dining on that  installation.
7. The Task Force recommended three major  changes in current arrangement practices:  mandate the use of commercial travel offices,  develop a DOD standardized full travel services  contract, and establish a single entity within DOD  to perform the commercial travel offices  contracting function.
The department updated its travel regulations to  mandate the use of CTOs for making DOD travel  arrangements and identified DTMO as the  department’s single travel procurement and contract  manager. In addition, DTMO is standardizing travel  service requirements as individual CTO contracts  become subject to renegotiation and renewal.
8. The Task Force recommended that DOD  provide incentives for the use of the charge card  by both organizations and individuals. Four  aspects of the card program must be improved to  create such incentives: management information,  rapid reconciliation (claims settlement), partial  payment, and flexible policies.
The intent of the recommendation was to realize  substantial benefits through the use of the government  charge card. Travel card usage has improved DOD’s  cash management by reducing the amount of  advances. DOD receives electronic information from  the credit card company that can be used to detect the  use of the credit card for inappropriate purposes. It  also reduces to less than five days the time it takes for  a travel voucher to be reimbursed/reconciled after a  voucher is electronically approved. The split  disbursement process, which is mandatory for the  military and civilian DOD employees, allows the  traveler to have part or all of the travel reimbursement  paid directly to the charge card account with the  balance paid (through Electronic Funds Transfer) to  the traveler’s bank account. A “partial payment option”  is available for travelers every 30 days if their TDY is  over 45 days long.
9. The Task Force recommended that supervisors  determine the appropriate status of the mission  and direct the travel arrangements accordingly.
The intent of this recommendation was to have the  traveler’s supervisor ensure that travel arrangements  were based on the needs/status of a mission rather  than the individual traveler. DTS routes a traveler’s  authorization request to the appropriate official with  the authority to approve, change, or deny the  electronically submitted travel itinerary.
DOD action taken to address the recommendation  10. The Task Force recommended that the use of  government facilities should be directed only if it  supports the mission.
The intent of this recommendation was to allow a DOD  civilian the option of using quarters and dining facilities  other than those of the military/government while on  TDY. According to Appendix O of the Joint Federal  Travel Regulations, military personnel are still required  to check the availability of government quarters before  using commercial quarters and dining facilities when  assigned to a military installation. If government  quarters and dining facilities are available, or if the  military member chooses to use other lodgings or  dining as a personal choice, reimbursement is limited  to the cost of government quarters or dining on that  installation.
11. The Task Force recommended that all  changes in accommodations be made through the  commercial travel offices 24-hour 800 service.
To address this recommendation, the department  requires all CTO contracts to provide support to DOD  travelers via toll-free numbers and collect call.
12. The Task Force recommended that DOD take  measures to reduce no-shows, perhaps through  improvements in contractual arrangements to  address options to guarantee reservations with a  charge card with penalties for no-shows, and  provide information to DOD travelers on no-shows.
The intent of this recommendation was to mandate  that all reservations be made through the CTO. The  department updated its travel regulations to mandate  the use of CTOs for making DOD travel arrangements.  Furthermore, DTS notifies the traveler if an  authorization is not approved by the authorizing  officer. After a specified period of time, all reservations  and associated travel reservations are automatically  canceled within DTS, if approval has not been  recorded in DTS.
13. The Task Force recommended that rental car  authorization should remain the decision of travel  authorizing or approving officials.
The intent of this recommendation was to ensure that  the authorizing official had the authority to decide on  whether or not a traveler should be approved to use a  rental car on a travel mission. Appendix O clearly  specifies that the authorizing official decides whether  or not a rental car is necessary to complete the  mission.
14. The Task Force recommended that the  reimbursement for phone calls to the traveler’s  family/home should remain the decision of the  travel authorizing or approving official.
The authorizing officer may determine whether  communications to a traveler’s family/home are  official. These communications must be only to advise  a family of a traveler’s safe arrival, to inquire/inform  about a medical condition, and/or to inform of a trip  itinerary change. The authorizing officer may approve  the charges after the TDY when appropriate.
15. The Task Force recommended that travelers  should be able to receive telephone approval from  their supervisor for changes or, in the absence of  a supervisor, to make common-sense decisions  about changes to a traveler’s trip itinerary.
The intent of this recommendation was to provide the  traveler with greater flexibility and authority to change  his or her itinerary to accommodate mission needs. If  a traveler’s plans change from the original approved  itinerary, the traveler should call the CTO and the  authorizing officer may approve the changes after the  trip is complete.
DOD action taken to address the recommendation  16. The Task Force recommended that  arrangements/itinerary should be established  upfront for the obligation of funds the supervisor  approves.
DTS obligates the funds once the travel authorization  has been approved by the authorizing officer.
17. The Task Force recommended the use of  single-source data entry starting with the authority  to travel as the basis for reimbursement and  automate the process.
The intent of this recommendation was to automate  the travel authorization and reimbursement process  from the beginning to the end. DTS has been  designed to create a single electronic trip record for all  official travel authorizations, modifications, and  payment decisions. The trip record is the single docu- ment that includes the travel authorization and fund  cite, cost estimate, itinerary and updates to the  itinerary made during the trip, and also serves as the  expense report when the traveler returns.
18. The Task Force recommended that to achieve  a paperless system, the receipt review and  retention process should stop with the supervisor’s  approval of the voucher.
The intent of this recommendation was to minimize  and simplify the receipt requirements. As allowed by  IRS, DOD has adopted the recommended receipt  threshold of $75 and provides the ability for the  traveler to store required receipts electronically.
19. The Task Force recommended that travel  accounting must be simplified and made more  accurate by funding all or as much travel as  possible at the organization level and using one  element of expense—TDY.
The intent of this recommendation was to reduce the  accounting information needed—commonly referred to  as the line of accounting. DOD has had a policy in  place since 1997 requiring the use of a single line of  accounting, but recognizes that in all cases this may  not be practical, especially when travel crosses fiscal  years.
20. The Task Force recommended that the  approved voucher should be transmitted via  electronic information to disbursing offices, as that  capability becomes available, and that audit and  review be based on random samples selected by  disbursing office.
The intent of this recommendation was for the  approved travel voucher to be electronically  transmitted to DFAS. DTS electronically transmits all  approved travel vouchers to DFAS. Subsequently,  DFAS uses DTS information to select travel vouchers  for postaudit reviews.
21. The Task Force recommended that the  traveler should have the option to elect on the  voucher to have the government pay the card  company directly for authorized charges with  residual expenses remitted to the individual.
The split disbursement process, which is mandatory  for military and civilian DOD employees, directs the  traveler to have part or all of their travel  reimbursement paid directly to the charge card  account with the balance paid (through Electronic  Funds Transfer) to their personal bank account. A  “partial payment option” is available for travelers every  30 days if their TDY is over 45 days long.
22. The Task Force recommended that an  alternative approach for ensuring appropriate  controls is to build as many considerations into the  authorizing and approval processes as possible  and have it done once with the same data flowing  through the steps in the process.
The intent of this recommendation was to implement a  system that would automate the authorization and  approval processes to the extent possible. DTS  functionality enables authorization and approval  consistent with DOD travel policy. For example, DOD  policy requires the use of GSA city-pair flights, unless  the traveler provides justification for another type of  flight. This justification must be approved by the  authorizing official.
section_title: Appendix V: List of Defense Agencies and Joint Commands
section_title: Appendix VI: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the above contacts, the following individuals made key  contributions to this report: Darby Smith, Assistant Director; Evelyn  Logue, Assistant Director; J. Christopher Martin, Senior-Level  Technologist; F. Abe Dymond, Assistant General Counsel; Jehan Abdel- Gawad, Senior Attorney; Beatrice Alff; Maxine Hattery; Jason Kelly; and  John Vicari.