Reconsideration of Ruling

GAO was asked whether its ruling that a new appointee assigned to training in Washington, D.C., may not have Washington designated as his first permanent duty station, must apply to Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) appointees. If this ruling applies, GAO was asked whether the new FBI appointees could be assigned to a permanent duty station at their place of appointment for as little as 1 month following initial training and, upon transfer, be granted relocation expenses. In the ruling in question, GAO found that the location of an employee's permanent duty station must be where the major part of the employee's duties are performed and where he is expected to spend the greater part of his time. GAO found that new appointees were not entitled to relocation expenses upon permanent assignment following training, but were required to bear the expense of reporting to the first permanent duty station. The new appointees were entitled to authorized subsistence at the temporary duty site and any travel expenses which were in excess of those which would have been incurred in traveling directly from home to their first duty station. Following this rule, the FBI has encountered serious staffing and recruiting problems. Because of the ruling, the FBI has changed its procedure and now designates the place where the appointee is recruited as the first official duty station. After training, new agents return to this office for 6 months of actual duty. Upon subsequent assignment to a new duty station, they are paid transfer related expenses. Thus, offices which recruit successfully become heavily staffed with new personnel, a less than optimum allocation of manpower and resources. GAO found that the administrative difficulties encountered by the FBI provided no basis to reverse or modify its holding. Accordingly, newly appointed FBI agents assigned to training in Washington, D.C. may not have Washington designated as their permanent duty station, and a brief assignment to a convenient location may not lessen a personal obligation for relocation expenses.