B-163187, FEB. 19, 1968

B-163187, FEB. 19, 1968

EMPLOYEES - TRANSFERS - HOME SALE/PURCHASE EXPENSES DECISION TO CERTIFYING OFFICER OF BUREAU OF RECLAMATION INTERIOR DEPT., CONCERNING PROPRIETY OF REIMBURSING EMPLOYEE FOR SALE OF FARM LAND PROPERTY ON TRANSFER FROM RUPERT, IDAHO TO SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA. EMPLOYEE WHO SELLS FARM ON WHICH HE RESIDED WHICH INCLUDED OUTBUILDINGS AND LAND MAY BE REIMBURSED ONLY THE PRO RATA COSTS INVOLVED IN SALE OF RESIDENCE. WHERE IN PARTICULAR INSTANCE VALUE OF RESIDENCE AND APPURTENANCES IS SAME AS RESIDENCE, OUTBUILDINGS AND NONPRODUCTIVE LAND EMPLOYEE MAY BE REIMBURSED 96/195TH OF COSTS.

TO MR. A. E. DAZELL:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 27, 1967, YOUR REFERENCE 2-363, BY WHICH YOU REQUEST OUR ADVANCE DECISION WHETHER YOU MAY PROPERLY CERTIFY FOR PAYMENT THE ENCLOSED VOUCHER OF MR. CARL M. LINDH, DATED NOVEMBER 6, 1967, TO REIMBURSE HIM THE COSTS HE INCURRED IN THE SALE OF HIS RESIDENCE AT HIS OLD OFFICIAL STATION IN CONNECTION WITH HIS TRANSFER FROM RUPERT, IDAHO, TO SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR.

THE REAL PROPERTY SOLD BY MR. LINDH CONSISTED OF A RURAL FARMHOUSE, OUTBUILDINGS AND 40 ACRES OF LAND. THE ACTUAL SALE PRICE OF THAT PROPERTY WAS APPARENTLY $24,500. THE FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION APPRAISED VALUE AT THE TIME OF SALE WAS $9,900 FOR THE PRODUCTIVE FARMLAND AND $9,600 FOR THE HOUSE, OUTBUILDINGS AND NONPRODUCTIVE LAND.

SECTION 4.1 OF THE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56 PROVIDES IN PERTINENT PART: "4.1 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS UNDER WHICH ALLOWANCES MAY BE PAID. TO THE EXTENT ALLOWABLE UNDER THIS PROVISION, THE GOVERNMENT WILL REIMBURSE AN EMPLOYEE FOR EXPENSES REQUIRED TO BE PAID BY HIM IN CONNECTION WITH THE SALE OF ONE RESIDENCE AT HIS OLD OFFICIAL STATION; PURCHASE OF ONE DWELLING AT HIS NEW OFFICIAL STATION; OR THE SETTLEMENT OF AN UNEXPIRED LEASE AT HIS PLACE OF RESIDENCE AT THE OLD OFFICIAL STATION; PROVIDED THAT:

* * * * * * * "E. THE EXPENSES FOR WHICH REIMBURSEMENT IS CLAIMED WERE PAID BY THE EMPLOYEE. IF ANY EXPENSES WERE SHARED BY PERSONS OTHER THAN THE EMPLOYEE, REIMBURSEMENT IS LIMITED TO THE PORTION ACTUALLY PAID BY THE EMPLOYEE. IF THE RESIDENCE IS A DUPLEX OR ANOTHER TYPE OF MULTIPLE OCCUPANCY DWELLING WHICH IS OCCUPIED ONLY PARTIALLY BY THE EMPLOYEE, OR WHENEVER THE EMPLOYEE SHARES RESPONSIBILITY FOR A LEASED PROPERTY (SUCH AS A SHARED APARTMENT ARRANGEMENT), EXPENSES WILL BE REIMBURSED ON A PRO RATE BASIS.'

THE UNDERLINED PART OF THE QUOTED REGULATIONS INDICATES THE INTENT OF THE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET TO RESTRICT REIMBURSEMENTS UNDER THAT SECTION TO THE PRO RATA COST INVOLVED IN THE SALE OF THE EMPLOYEE'S LIVING QUARTERS WHEN THE TRANSACTION INCLUDES THE SALE OF A MULTIFAMILY DWELLING. 5 U.S.C. 5724A (A) UNDER WHICH THAT REGULATION WAS ISSUED PROVIDES ONLY FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COSTS INVOLVED IN THE SALE OF THE EMPLOYEE'S RESIDENCE. WE BELIEVE THAT THE REGULATION DIRECTING REIMBURSEMENT ON A PRO RATA BASIS WHEN THE EMPLOYEE SELLS SOMETHING IN ADDITION TO HIS RESIDENCE IS REQUIRED. ACCORDINGLY, WE HOLD THAT AN EMPLOYEE WHO SELLS THE FARM ON WHICH HE HAS RESIDED AT HIS OLD DUTY STATION MAY BE REIMBURSED ONLY THE PRO RATA COSTS INVOLVED IN THE SALE OF THE RESIDENCE.

THEREFORE, ASSUMING THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT THE VALUE OF THE RESIDENCE AND APPURTENANCES WAS VIRTUALLY THE SAME AS THAT PLACED UPON THE RESIDENCE, OUTBUILDINGS AND NONPRODUCTIVE LAND BY THE FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION, MR. LINDH SHOULD BE REIMBURSED 96/195THS OF OTHERWISE REIMBURSABLE COSTS.

THE VOUCHER, WHICH IS RETURNED HEREWITH TOGETHER WITH SUPPORTING PAPERS, MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE.