B-172594, JUN 8, 1972

B-172594, JUN 8, 1972

CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE - REDUCTION IN FORCE - OVERSEAS STATION - REEMPLOYMENT DECISION OPPOSING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS, VOL. 2, TO GOVERN THE SITUATION WHERE AN OVERSEAS EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, WHO IS SEPARATED DUE TO A REDUCTION IN FORCE, RETURNS TO HIS ACTUAL PLACE OF RESIDENCE AND AFTER A BREAK IN SERVICE, BUT WITHIN A YEAR OF SEPARATION, ACCEPTS ANOTHER POSITION WITHIN SUCH DEPARTMENT. WHEN AN AGENCY EMPLOYING AN INDIVIDUAL AT AN OVERSEAS DUTY STATION SATISFIES ITS OBLIGATION UNDER 5 U.S.C. 5722(A)(2) FOR THOSE EXPENSES WHICH ARE INCURRED IN RETURNING THE INDIVIDUAL TO HIS ACTUAL RESIDENCE AT THE TIME OF OVERSEAS ASSIGNMENT, ITS LIABILITY TERMINATES. ANY ADDITIONAL ALLOWABLE TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES OF THE REEMPLOYED EMPLOYEE ARE COVERED UNDER 5 U.S.C. 5724(A)(C) AND SHOULD BE PAID FROM THE FUNDS OF THE DEPARTMENT TO WHICH THE EMPLOYEE IS TREATED BY LAW AS TRANSFERRED. ACCORDINGLY, GAO DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD BE PROPER TO AMEND THE JTR IN THE MANNER PROPOSED.

TO MR. HADLAI HULL:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED MARCH 10, 1972, WHICH REQUESTS AN ADVANCE DECISION REGARDING A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS (JTR), VOLUME 2. THE PROPOSAL CONCERNS THE SITUATION WHERE AN OVERSEAS EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, WHO IS SEPARATED DUE TO A REDUCTION IN FORCE, RETURNS TO HIS ACTUAL PLACE OF RESIDENCE AND AFTER A BREAK IN SERVICE, BUT WITHIN A YEAR OF SEPARATION, ACCEPTS ANOTHER POSITION WITHIN SUCH DEPARTMENT. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD PROVIDE THAT IN SUCH A SITUATION THE LOSING ACTIVITY IS OBLIGATED TO FUND THE ENTIRE TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION COSTS.

IT IS STATED IN YOUR LETTER THAT, CONSIDERING THE METHOD OF FUNDING CITED IN 51 COMP. GEN. 14 (1971), DOUBT EXISTS AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT. ACCORDINGLY, WE HAVE BEEN ASKED TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:

1. " *** WHETHER IT WOULD BE PROPER FOR THE LOSING ACTIVITY ALONE TO PAY ALL THE TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION COSTS AS PROPOSED.

2. " *** WHETHER IT WOULD BE PROPER FOR THE LOSING AGENCY TO PAY ALSO THE COST OF THE TRANSFER BENEFITS PROVIDED FOR UNDER PUBLIC LAW 89 516, WHERE APPLICABLE *** .

3. " *** WHETHER THE FUNDING, IF PERMITTED TO BE BORNE BY THE LOSING ACTIVITY ALONE, WOULD BE LIMITED IN PAYMENT, I.E; NOT TO EXCEED THE COST FROM THE OLD TO THE NEW PERMANENT DUTY STATION."

IN THE CITED DECISION WE HELD THAT IN A SITUATION SUCH AS HERE INVOLVED -

" *** IT WOULD BE PROPER FOR THE LOSING AGENCY TO PAY THE EXPENSES INCURRED IN TRAVELING TO THE PLACE OF ACTUAL RESIDENCE OR SOME OTHER SELECTED POINT IN THE UNITED STATES BUT NOT TO EXCEED THE CONSTRUCTIVE COST OF TRAVEL TO THE PLACE OF ACTUAL RESIDENCE. AT THIS POINT THE EMPLOYEE IS SEPARATED AND MAY OR MAY NOT BE ENTITLED TO ADDITIONAL TRAVEL. IF SUBSEQUENT TO ARRIVING AT THE PLACE OF RESIDENCE AND AFTER REMOVAL FROM THE ROLLS THE FORMER EMPLOYEE IS HIRED BY AN AGENCY WITHIN 1 YEAR AFTER SEPARATION AND THEREBY WITHIN THE ENTITLEMENT OF 5 U.S.C. 5724AC), THE ACQUIRING AGENCY SHOULD, CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL AUTHORITY OF 5 U.S.C. 5724A, BEAR THE EXPENSES OF HIS TRAVEL FROM THE PLACE OF ACTUAL RESIDENCE OR OTHER SELECTED POINT TO THE DUTY STATION FOR THE NEW POSITION IN WHICH HE IS EMPLOYED. THE ALLOWABLE COST COULD NOT EXCEED THE COST OF DIRECT TRAVEL FROM THE OLD TO THE NEW DUTY STATION, LESS THE COST INCURRED BY THE LOSING AGENCY FOR RETURN TRAVEL AS INDICATED ABOVE. CF. 46 COMP. GEN. 628 (1967). HOWEVER, IN THE EVENT THE COSTS PAID BY THE LOSING AGENCY ARE IN EXCESS OF COSTS WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN INCURRED FOR DIRECT TRAVEL FROM THE OLD DUTY STATION TO THE NEW DUTY STATION, NO RECOUPMENT OF MONIES ALREADY PAID IS NECESSARY. SEE 47 COMP. GEN. 763 (1968), AT PAGE 765."

OUR DECISION RECOGNIZED THE FACT THAT WHEN AN AGENCY EMPLOYING AN INDIVIDUAL AT AN OVERSEAS DUTY STATION SATISFIED ITS LIABILITY UNDER 5 U.S.C. 5722(A)(2) FOR THOSE EXPENSES WHICH ARE INCURRED IN RETURNING THE INDIVIDUAL TO HIS ACTUAL RESIDENCE AT THE TIME OF OVERSEAS ASSIGNMENT, ITS LIABILITY TERMINATED. THE AUTHORITY FOR PAYING THE REEMPLOYED EMPLOYEE ANY ADDITIONAL TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES IS DERIVED FROM 5 U.S.C. 5724AC) RATHER THAN 5 U.S.C. 5724(E). IT WAS THEREFORE OUR POSITION THAT IN A SITUATION, SUCH AS HERE INVOLVED, ANY ADDITIONAL ALLOWABLE EXPENSES WILL BE PAID FROM THE FUNDS OF THE DEPARTMENT TO WHICH THE EMPLOYEE IS TREATED BY LAW AS TRANSFERRED. SEE THE FIRST SENTENCE OF OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A 56, REVISED AUGUST 17, 1971, SECTION 1.4. WE THUS RECOGNIZED THAT THIS METHOD OF "SPLIT FUNDING," WITH THE RETURN EXPENSES TO THE RESIDENCE BEING TREATED AS INCIDENT TO A SEPARATION, WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE SINCE UTILIZATION OF SUCH A PROCEDURE WOULD ENABLE BOTH THE LOSING AND GAINING ACTIVITIES TO COMPLY WITH THEIR STATUTORY DUTIES.

IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT IS OUR POSITION THAT IT WOULD NOT BE PROPER TO AMEND JTR TO PROVIDE THAT, IN THE TYPE OF SITUATION OUTLINED ABOVE, THE LOSING ACTIVITY BEAR ALL COSTS. ACCORDINGLY, YOUR FIRST AND SECOND QUESTIONS ARE ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE. IT FOLLOWS THAT NO REPLY IS REQUIRED TO THE THIRD QUESTION.