A-89229, OCTOBER 7, 1937, 17 COMP. GEN. 315

A-89229, OCTOBER 7, 1937, 17 COMP. GEN. 315

LEAVES OF ABSENCE - TRANSFERS OF FUNDS TO COVER ACCRUED LEAVE OF EMPLOYEES LOANED OR DETAILED THE SALARY OF AN EMPLOYEE IS CHARGEABLE TO THE PARTICULAR APPROPRIATION UNDER WHICH HE IS EMPLOYED AT THE TIME WHETHER HE BE ACTUALLY ON DUTY OR ON AUTHORIZED LEAVE OF ABSENCE WITH PAY, AND THERE IS NO AUTHORITY FOR A TRANSFER OF FUNDS BETWEEN AGENCIES TO COVER LEAVE ACCRUED BUT NOT TAKEN BY AN EMPLOYEE WHILE TEMPORARILY LOANED OR DETAILED FROM ONE AGENCY TO ANOTHER. 16 COMP. GEN. 1122, AMPLIFIED.

ACTING COMPTROLLER GENERAL ELLIOTT TO THE CHAIRMAN, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, OCTOBER 7, 1937:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE FOLLOWING LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 16, 1937, FROM THE COMPTROLLER, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY:

IN PAYMENT OF A BILLING IN THE AMOUNT OF $379.28 AGAINST THE PUERTO RICO RECONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION FOR THE LOAN OF PERSONNEL OF THE AUTHORITY, A CHECK FOR $335.65 WAS RECENTLY RECEIVED. UPON INQUIRY TO THE PUERTO RICO RECONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION, WE WERE SUPPLIED WITH PREAUDIT DIFFERENCE STATEMENT ISSUED BY YOUR OFFICE AUGUST 9, 1937, AGAINST PUERTO RICO RECONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION VOUCHER NO. 1538, IN WHICH EXCEPTION WAS TAKEN TO A CHARGE IN THE AMOUNT OF $43.63 COVERING THE VALUE OF LEAVE PRIVILEGES WHICH ACCRUED TO THE PERSONNEL LOANED DURING EMPLOYMENT WITH THE PUERTO RICO RECONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION. REFERENCE IS MADE IN THE PREAUDIT DIFFERENCE STATEMENT TO DECISION OF YOUR OFFICE A-87116, JUNE 28, 1937.

THE DECISION REFERRED TO RELATES TO THE PERMANENT TRANSFER OF PERSONNEL FROM ONE DEPARTMENT TO ANOTHER, THE QUESTION BEING WHETHER OR NOT, UPON SUCH TRANSFERS, AMOUNTS OF MONEY REPRESENTING THE TOTAL VALUE OF ACCRUED LEAVE AS OF DATE OF TRANSFER SHOULD BE PAID FROM ONE DEPARTMENT TO THE OTHER. THE BILLING AGAINST THE PUERTO RICO RECONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION WAS FOR A TEMPORARY LOAN OF PERSONNEL COVERED BY A DEFINITE AGREEMENT IN WHICH PROVISION WAS MADE FOR REIMBURSEMENT TO THE AUTHORITY OF ACTUAL SALARIES PLUS THE VALUE OF LEAVE ACCRUED DURING THE PERIOD OF LOAN. APPLY DECISION A-87116 TO SUCH A SITUATION IN EFFECT DEPLETES THE APPROPRIATION OF THE AGENCY MAKING LOAN OF PERSONNEL. WHEN THE PERSONNEL LOANED TO OTHER AGENCIES TAKE LEAVE EARNED DURING THE PERIOD OF LOAN, THE AUTHORITY PAYS FROM ITS OWN APPROPRIATION THE SALARIES FOR THE PERIOD OF LEAVE. THEREFORE, A CHARGE AGAINST THE AGENCY RECEIVING SUCH LOANS FOR THE LEAVE ACCRUED DURING THE DAYS ACTUALLY WORKED FOR THE AGENCY RECEIVING LOAN DOES NOT RESULT IN AUGMENTING THE APPROPRIATIONS OF THE AUTHORITY.

WE ARE ASKING THE PUERTO RICO RECONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION, PER COPY OF LETTER ATTACHED, TO RESUBMIT THE AMOUNT WHICH WAS DEDUCTED FROM THEIR VOUCHER 1538, AND ASK THAT YOUR OFFICE RECONSIDER THE ACTION TAKEN.

IN THE CITED DECISION OF JUNE 28, 1937, 16 COMP. GEN. 1122, 1123, IT IS HELD, AS FOLLOWS:

A SALARY OF AN EMPLOYEE WHILE ON LEAVE IS PAYABLE FROM THE CURRENT APPROPRIATION OTHERWISE AVAILABLE FOR HIS COMPENSATION WHEN WORKING. THE FACT THAT THE RIGHT TO SUCH LEAVE MAY HAVE ACCRUED IN SOME OTHER BRANCH OF THE SERVICE DOES NOT AUTHORIZE AUGMENTING THE AVAILABLE APPROPRIATION BY A TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE BRANCH OF THE SERVICE IN WHICH HE WAS FORMERLY EMPLOYED. YOUR QUESTION IS ACCORDINGLY ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE.

WHILE IT IS TRUE, AS STATED, THE TRANSFER INVOLVED IN THE CASE CONSIDERED IN THAT DECISION WAS A PERMANENT TRANSFER FROM ONE BRANCH OF THE WAR DEPARTMENT TO ANOTHER, THE RULE STATED IS ALSO APPLICABLE TO A TEMPORARY TRANSFER OR LOAN OF EMPLOYEES FROM ONE SERVICE TO ANOTHER. PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS FOR EACH OF THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED ON THE BASIS THAT THE EMPLOYEES ARE ENTITLED TO THE STATUTORY AMOUNT OF LEAVE WITH PAY. IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT AUTHORIZED LEAVE IS SYNONYMOUS WITH WORK. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS NECESSARY TO CONCLUDE THAT WHETHER AN EMPLOYEE BE ACTUALLY ON DUTY OR ON AUTHORIZED LEAVE OF ABSENCE WITH PAY THE SALARY OF THE EMPLOYEE IS CHARGEABLE TO THE PARTICULAR APPROPRIATION UNDER WHICH EMPLOYED AT THE TIME.

IF, IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE EMPLOYEES HAD ACTUALLY BEEN GRANTED LEAVE WITH PAY DURING THE PERIOD OF THE LOAN, THE PUERTO RICO RECONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED TO REIMBURSE THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY THE AMOUNT OF THE SALARY COVERING THE PERIOD OF LEAVE AS THOUGH THE EMPLOYEES WERE ACTUALLY ON DUTY, BUT THERE WAS NO AUTHORITY TO CHARGE THE PUERTO RICO RECONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION THE PRO RATA COST OF LEAVE WHICH ACCRUED BUT APPARENTLY WAS NOT TAKEN DURING THE PERIOD OF THE LOAN OR DETAIL.