B-163043, JUN. 18, 1968

B-163043, JUN. 18, 1968

TO MISS ANNE M. CRUGNALE:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 10, 1968, YOUR REFERENCE A:F:F:V, TO THE CLAIMS DIVISION OF OUR OFFICE REQUESTING, IN VIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PRESENTED, RECONSIDERATION OF THE DECISION B- 163043, JANUARY 12, 1968, WHICH DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF MILTON KYHOS, AN EMPLOYEE OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF SUBSISTENCE EXPENSES HE INCURRED FOR 30 DAYS SUBSEQUENT TO HIS TRANSFER TO WASHINGTON, D.C., IN OCTOBER 1967.

IN THE DECISION OF JANUARY 12, WE SAID IN PART:

"MR. KYHOS RENTED AN UNFURNISHED APARTMENT IN BLADENSBURG, MARYLAND, UPON ARRIVAL IN THE WASHINGTON AREA AND MOVED HOUSEHOLD GOODS INTO THAT APARTMENT. HE CLAIMS REIMBURSEMENT OF HIS COSTS OF SUBSISTENCE FOR 30 DAYS WHILE OCCUPYING THOSE QUARTERS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 5 U.S.C. 5724A (A) (3) AND SECTION 2.5 OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56. THE ONLY INFORMATION FURNISHED TO ESTABLISH THAT THE APARTMENT IN BLADENSBURG MAY BE CONSIDERED TEMPORARY QUARTERS AS REQUIRED UNDER THE CITED LAW AND REGULATION, IS MR. KYHOS' STATEMENT THAT HE WILL OCCUPY LARGER AND MORE SUITABLE QUARTERS WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE. NO INFORMATION HAS BEEN FURNISHED WITH REGARD TO THE LENGTH OF TIME MR. KYHOS INTENDS TO OCCUPY THE APARTMENT IN BLADENSBURG AND NO EXPLANATION HAS BEEN FURNISHED AS TO WHY -LARGER AND MORE SUITABLE QUARTERS' WERE NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME HE TRANSFERRED.'

THE STATEMENT OF MR. KYHOS DATED APRIL 16, 1968, WHICH YOU FURNISHED WITH YOUR LETTER OF MAY 10, SHOWS THAT HE WAS RESIDING IN THE APARTMENT HE RENTED IN OCTOBER 1967 AT THAT TIME AND THAT HE HAD NO FIXED PLANS FOR MOVING OUT OF THAT APARTMENT, ALTHOUGH HE WAS TO MOVE INTO A LARGER APARTMENT IN THE SAME BUILDING OR DEVELOPMENT WHEN SUCH LARGER APARTMENT BECAME AVAILABLE AND WAS SEARCHING FOR A "SUITABLE" PRIVATE RESIDENCE TO WHICH HE COULD MOVE.

WE DO NOT BELIEVE THE TERM "TEMPORARY QUARTERS" AS USED IN THE CONTROLLING LAW AND REGULATION MAY BE INTERPRETED AS APPLICABLE TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH MR. KYHOS MOVED INTO THE QUARTERS IN QUESTION. THAT TERM IS VIEWED AS PRINCIPALLY REFERRING TO TRANSIENT TYPE QUARTERS WHICH ARE OCCUPIED BY EMPLOYEES AND THEIR FAMILIES GENERALLY FOR PERIODS OF LESS THAN 30 DAYS. ALTHOUGH, IN PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES WE HAVE CONSIDERED QUARTERS OCCUPIED FOR LONGER PERIODS AS BEING TEMPORARY QUARTERS, SOME OTHER FACTOR JUSTIFYING SUCH A DETERMINATION MUST BE INVOLVED -- SUCH AS THE FACT THAT THE EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY HAS DELAYED JOINING HIM AT THE NEW STATION SO THAT HIS CHILDREN COULD COMPLETE A SCHOOL TERM AT THE OLD STATION. 47 COMP. GEN. 84. THE EMPLOYEE'S INTENT, SOME 6 MONTHS AFTER HIS TRANSFER, TO MOVE INTO A LARGER APARTMENT OR TO MOVE INTO A PRIVATE RESIDENCE AT SOME LATER DATE IS NOT CONSIDERED AS A SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR A DETERMINATION THAT THE SMALLER APARTMENT WAS TEMPORARY QUARTERS.

THEREFORE, THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PRESENTED WITH YOUR LETTER OF MAY 10 MAY NOT SERVE AS A BASIS FOR PAYMENT OF MR. KYHOS' CLAIM. THE FILE TRANSMITTED WITH YOUR LETTER IS RETURNED.