A-66999, NOVEMBER 9, 1935, 15 COMP. GEN. 389

A-66999: Nov 9, 1935

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

PERSONAL SERVICES - RURAL REHABILITATION PROJECTS - FUNDS CHARGEABLE AUTHORIZED PAYMENTS MADE TO AN ARCHITECT WHOSE SERVICES ARE CONFINED TO A PARTICULAR PROJECT ARE CHARGEABLE TO FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR THE RURAL REHABILITATION PROJECT CONCERNED RATHER THAN TO THE ALLOCATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. BE CHARGEABLE TO THE ALLOCATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES AND NOT THE ALLOCATION FROM WHICH SAID LOANS OR GRANTS ARE MADE. THE ALLOCATIONS OF THESE FUNDS HAVE BEEN MADE FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS. THE QUESTION ARISES IN SPECIFIC CASES AS TO WHETHER CERTAIN EXPENDITURES ARE PROPERLY ALLOCABLE TO PROJECT COSTS OR TO ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. YOUR DECISION IS REQUESTED ON THE FOLLOWING PROBLEMS: 1. IN CONNECTION WITH THESE PROJECTS IT IS.

A-66999, NOVEMBER 9, 1935, 15 COMP. GEN. 389

PERSONAL SERVICES - RURAL REHABILITATION PROJECTS - FUNDS CHARGEABLE AUTHORIZED PAYMENTS MADE TO AN ARCHITECT WHOSE SERVICES ARE CONFINED TO A PARTICULAR PROJECT ARE CHARGEABLE TO FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR THE RURAL REHABILITATION PROJECT CONCERNED RATHER THAN TO THE ALLOCATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. THE COST OF SERVICES OF CASE SUPERVISORS, FARM MANAGEMENT ADVISERS, AND PERSONNEL OF THAT CHARACTER EMPLOYED TO FURNISH ADVICE AND SUPERVISION TO FAMILIES AND COOPERATIVES IN CONNECTION WITH RURAL REHABILITATION LOANS OR GRANTS, ALTHOUGH NOT APPARENT BY WHAT AUTHORITY OF LAW PAYABLE FROM FUNDS APPROPRIATED UNDER THE EMERGENCY RELIEF APPROPRIATION ACT OF 1935, APPROVED APRIL 8, 1935 (49 STAT. 115), WOULD, IF PROPER, BE CHARGEABLE TO THE ALLOCATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES AND NOT THE ALLOCATION FROM WHICH SAID LOANS OR GRANTS ARE MADE.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE ADMINISTRATOR, RESETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATION, NOVEMBER 9, 1935:

THERE HAS BEEN RECEIVED YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 25, 1935, AS FOLLOWS:

THE RESETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATION, UNDER SEVERAL LETTERS OF ALLOCATION BY THE PRESIDENT, HAS RECEIVED FUNDS TRANSFERRED FROM THE APPROPRIATION MADE UNDER THE EMERGENCY RELIEF APPROPRIATION ACT OF 1935. THE ALLOCATIONS OF THESE FUNDS HAVE BEEN MADE FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS. IN ADDITION TO SUCH ALLOCATIONS, THE RESETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATION HAS RECEIVED SPECIFIC ALLOCATIONS OF FUNDS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES, BOTH FOR WASHINGTON AND THE FIELD.

THE QUESTION ARISES IN SPECIFIC CASES AS TO WHETHER CERTAIN EXPENDITURES ARE PROPERLY ALLOCABLE TO PROJECT COSTS OR TO ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

YOUR DECISION IS REQUESTED ON THE FOLLOWING PROBLEMS:

1. UNDER LETTER OF ALLOCATION NO. 551, THE PRESIDENT ALLOTTED $31,000,000 TO THE RESETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATION FOR CERTAIN SPECIFIC RURAL REHABILITATION PROJECTS. IN CONNECTION WITH THESE PROJECTS IT IS, OF COURSE, NECESSARY FOR THE RESETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATION TO EMPLOY ARCHITECTS TO MAKE THE NECESSARY PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. A PARTICULAR ARCHITECT, THUS EMPLOYED, IS ASSIGNED TO ONLY ONE PROJECT AND DOES WORK ONLY IN CONNECTION WITH ONE OF THE SEVERAL PROJECTS. HE MAY BE LOCATED EITHER IN WASHINGTON OR NEAR THE SITE OF THE PROJECT. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE COMPENSATION TO BE PAID TO SUCH ARCHITECT IS PROPERLY ALLOCABLE TO ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES OR TO THE PROJECT COST FOR THE PARTICULAR PROJECT TO WHICH HE IS ASSIGNED.

2. UNDER LETTER OF ALLOCATION NO. 56, THE PRESIDENT ALLOTTED $91,000,000 FOR RURAL REHABILITATION PROJECTS. IN MY LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 19, 1935, SUBMITTED TO YOU, I INDICATED THAT APPROXIMATELY $44,000,000 OF THIS ALLOCATION WOULD BE USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING LOANS AND GRANTS TO INDIVIDUAL FAMILIES OR COOPERATIVES, AND ALSO ADVISED THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH THESE LOANS OR GRANTS WOULD BE MADE. UNDER LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 27, 1935, YOU INDICATED THAT THE EXPENDITURE OF THIS AMOUNT FOR THE PURPOSES INDICATED IN MY LETTER IS AUTHORIZED.

THE PROCEDURE FOR MAKING LOANS OR GRANTS TO APPROXIMATELY 525,000 FAMILIES, WHICH IS THE NUMBER THE RESETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATION WILL BE HANDLING STARTING NOVEMBER 1, 1935, INVOLVES A VERY LARGE STAFF OF CASE SUPERVISORS, FARM MANAGEMENT ADVISERS, AND OTHER PERSONNEL OF THIS CHARACTER. THE FUNCTIONS OF SUCH PERSONNEL ARE TO FURNISH ADVICE AND SUPERVISION TO THE INDIVIDUAL FAMILIES AND COOPERATIVES WHICH RECEIVE THE BENEFITS OF THESE LOANS AND GRANTS. THE SPECIFIC PROBLEM ARISES AS TO WHETHER SUCH SUPERVISING PERSONNEL, WHO HAVE THEIR FUNCTIONS RESTRICTED TO ADVISING AND SUPERVISING THE INDIVIDUAL FAMILIES AND COOPERATIVES WHICH ARE RECEIVING THE BENEFITS OF THESE LOANS AND GRANTS, SHOULD HAVE THEIR COMPENSATION ALLOCABLE TO THE PROJECT COST, NAMELY, THE $44,000,000, TO BE EXPENDED FOR THESE PURPOSES, OR TO FUNDS ALLOCATED TO THE RESETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE FOREGOING QUESTIONS ARE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO THIS ADMINISTRATION, YOUR EARLY CONSIDERATION OF THESE PROBLEMS WILL BE APPRECIATED.

THE SERVICE OF AN ARCHITECT, WHEN CONFINED TO A PARTICULAR PROJECT, PROPERLY MAY BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE COST OF THAT PROJECT AND THE AUTHORIZED EXPENDITURES THEREFOR ARE CHARGEABLE TO THE FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR THE PROJECT RATHER THAN TO THE ALLOCATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

THE COST OF THE SERVICES OF CASE SUPERVISORS, FARM MANAGEMENT ADVISERS, AND PERSONNEL OF THAT CHARACTER, IF OTHERWISE LEGAL AND PROPER, WOULD BE CHARGEABLE TO THE ALLOCATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES AND NOT TO THE ALLOCATION FROM WHICH THE LOANS OR GRANTS WERE MADE, BUT IT IS NOT APPARENT UNDER WHAT AUTHORITY OF LAW IT COULD BE HELD THAT ANY FUNDS APPROPRIATED UNDER THE EMERGENCY RELIEF APPROPRIATION ACT OF 1935 ARE AVAILABLE FOR THE EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL "TO FURNISH ADVICE AND SUPERVISION TO THE INDIVIDUAL FAMILIES AND COOPERATIVES" TO WHICH LOANSOR GRANTS HAVE BEEN MADE.