B-167047, JUL. 10, 1969
Highlights
JENSEN'S ADDITIONAL CLAIMS TOTALING $411.70 WERE ADMINISTRATIVELY DENIED ON THE BASIS THAT THE CLAIMED EXPENSES REPRESENT THE PURCHASE OF NEW FURNISHINGS. THE SUSPENDED AMOUNT CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: INSTALLATION OF CARPETING $214.70 PURCHASE OF NEW DRAPES AND DRAPERY HARDWARE 183.74 PURCHASE OF CLOTHESLINE POLES 13.26 WE CONSISTENTLY HAVE HELD THAT THE REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 3 OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. THERE ARE NO FACTS OF RECORD IN THE PRESENT CASE WHICH WOULD WARRANT AN EXCEPTION TO THAT RULE. THE EMPLOYEE HAS FURNISHED THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT: "TWO RECEIPTS WERE SUBMITTED. NO ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO CLAIM REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE COST OF THE NEW CARPETING WHICH WAS INSTALLED. * * ONE RECEIPT.
B-167047, JUL. 10, 1969
TO MR. OSCAR K. RODGERS:
WE REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 23, 1969, WITH ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING OUR DECISION WHETHER YOU MAY CERTIFY FOR PAYMENT A RECLAIM VOUCHER FOR $411.70 IN FAVOR OF MR. EUGENE T. JENSEN FOR MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES INCURRED BY HIM IN CONNECTION WITH A TRANSFER OF STATION FROM WASHINGTON, D.C., TO CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, UNDER TRAVEL ORDER DATED JUNE 14, 1968.
THE RECORD SHOWS THAT MR. JENSEN HAS BEEN PAID THE SUM OF $231.24 FOR MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3.2A (2) OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56, REVISED OCTOBER 12, 1966. HOWEVER, MR. JENSEN'S ADDITIONAL CLAIMS TOTALING $411.70 WERE ADMINISTRATIVELY DENIED ON THE BASIS THAT THE CLAIMED EXPENSES REPRESENT THE PURCHASE OF NEW FURNISHINGS. THE SUSPENDED AMOUNT CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
INSTALLATION OF CARPETING $214.70
PURCHASE OF NEW DRAPES AND DRAPERY HARDWARE 183.74
PURCHASE OF CLOTHESLINE POLES 13.26
WE CONSISTENTLY HAVE HELD THAT THE REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 3 OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56 DO NOT CONTEMPLATE UNDERWRITING THE EXPENSE OF AN ORIGINAL PURCHASE OF FURNISHINGS FOR THE NEW RESIDENCE. ADDITION TO B-163449, CITED IN YOUR LETTER, SEE B 161742, JULY 7, 1967, AND B-165745, FEBRUARY 11, 1969, COPIES HEREWITH. THERE ARE NO FACTS OF RECORD IN THE PRESENT CASE WHICH WOULD WARRANT AN EXCEPTION TO THAT RULE. THEREFORE, THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE EMPLOYEE IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURCHASE OF NEW DRAPES AND DRAPERY HARDWARE ($183.74) AND CLOTHESLINE POLES ($13.26) MAY NOT BE ALLOWED.
WITH RESPECT TO THE EXPENSES INCURRED FOR INSTALLATION OF CARPETS, THE EMPLOYEE HAS FURNISHED THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT: "TWO RECEIPTS WERE SUBMITTED, ONE FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW CARPETING AND THE OTHER FOR THE INSTALLATION OF PREVIOUSLY USED CARPETING. NO ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO CLAIM REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE COST OF THE NEW CARPETING WHICH WAS INSTALLED. * *
ONE RECEIPT, DATED JULY 12, 1968, IS FOR $157.50 AND COVERS THE COST OF INSTALLING 105 SQUARE YARDS OF WALL-TO-WALL CARPETING. THE OTHER RECEIPT, DATED JULY 23, 1968, IS FOR $57.20 AND COVERS THE PURCHASE PRICE (INCLUDING TAX) OF 20 SQUARE YARDS OF PADDING ($27.20) AND AN INSTALLATION CHARGE OF $30.
ALTHOUGH THE MATTER IS NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR ON THE PRESENT RECORD, IT APPEARS THAT THE EXPENSE OF $157.50 REPRESENTS THE COST OF INSTALLING THE PREVIOUSLY USED (IN THE FORMER RESIDENCE) CARPETING REFERRED TO IN THE EMPLOYEE'S STATEMENT QUOTED ABOVE. IF THAT IS SO, THE EXPENSE MAY BE ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 3.1B (2) OF CIRCULAR NO. A-56.
THE EXPENSE OF $57.20, COVERING THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF NEW PADDING MAY NOT BE ALLOWED SINCE SUCH AMOUNT REPRESENTS THE COST OF NEW FURNISHINGS.
THE VOUCHER IS RETURNED HEREWITH FOR HANDLING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE.