B-169770, JUN. 16, 1970

B-169770: Jun 16, 1970

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

HILL: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 5. YOU STATE THAT IN SEPTEMBER 1966 YOU WERE TRANSFERRED FROM THE REGIONAL OFFICE OF THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE. THE CLOSING DATE OF THE SALE WAS MARCH 16. 022 WHICH WAS DISALLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR DECISION B-164104. THAT ABSENT LITIGATION THE EXPENSES RELATIVE TO THE SALE OF A RESIDENCE WILL BE REIMBURSED ONLY IF THE SETTLEMENT DATE IS NOT LATER THAN ONE YEAR AFTER THE DATE ON WHICH THE EMPLOYEE REPORTED FOR DUTY AT THE NEW OFFICIAL STATION. A-56 WAS REVISED EFFECTIVE JUNE 26. YOU ASK US TO REEVALUATE YOUR CLAIM TAKING INTO ACCOUNT YOUR STATEMENT THAT YOU WERE NOT AWARE OF THE ONE-YEAR LIMITATION IMPOSED BY THE REGULATION AND THAT YOU DECIDED TO RENT RATHER THAN TO SELL IN SEPTEMBER 1966 WHICH WAS PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE REVISION OF THE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO.

B-169770, JUN. 16, 1970

TO MR. DONALD T. HILL:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 5, 1970, IN WHICH YOU REQUEST A REEVALUATION OF YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,022 INCURRED AS A RESULT OF THE SALE OF YOUR RESIDENCE NEAR CINCINNATI, OHIO.

YOU STATE THAT IN SEPTEMBER 1966 YOU WERE TRANSFERRED FROM THE REGIONAL OFFICE OF THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, CINCINNATI, OHIO, TO WASHINGTON, D. C; AND THAT AT THAT TIME YOU DECIDED TO RENT YOUR RESIDENCE NEAR CINCINNATI, OHIO.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT YOU SOLD YOUR RESIDENCE ON MARCH 1, 1968, AND THE CLOSING DATE OF THE SALE WAS MARCH 16, 1968. ON MAY 17, 1968, YOU SUBMITTED A CLAIM FOR $1,022 WHICH WAS DISALLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR DECISION B-164104, MAY 27, 1968, WHICH APPLIED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 4.1D OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56, REVISED OCTOBER 12, 1966, NAMELY, THAT ABSENT LITIGATION THE EXPENSES RELATIVE TO THE SALE OF A RESIDENCE WILL BE REIMBURSED ONLY IF THE SETTLEMENT DATE IS NOT LATER THAN ONE YEAR AFTER THE DATE ON WHICH THE EMPLOYEE REPORTED FOR DUTY AT THE NEW OFFICIAL STATION.

SINCE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56 WAS REVISED EFFECTIVE JUNE 26, 1969, YOU ASK US TO REEVALUATE YOUR CLAIM TAKING INTO ACCOUNT YOUR STATEMENT THAT YOU WERE NOT AWARE OF THE ONE-YEAR LIMITATION IMPOSED BY THE REGULATION AND THAT YOU DECIDED TO RENT RATHER THAN TO SELL IN SEPTEMBER 1966 WHICH WAS PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE REVISION OF THE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56 ON OCTOBER 12, 1966.

THE REVISION OF THE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56 ON JUNE 26, 1969, AUTHORIZED EXTENSION OF THE SETTLEMENT DATE FOR REASONS OTHER THAN LITIGATION PROVIDING THAT ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE SALE OF THE RESIDENCE ARE MADE WITHIN ONE YEAR. SEE SUBSECTION 4.1E.

YOU ENTERED INTO A CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENT TO SELL YOUR HOUSE ON MARCH 1, 1968, WHICH IS MORE THAN ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE YOU REPORTED FOR DUTY AT YOUR NEW OFFICIAL STATION AND MORE THAN ONE YEAR PRIOR TO THE 1969 REVISION OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56. THUS, IN ADDITION TO YOUR NOT HAVING MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CIRCULAR AS REVISED IN 1966, YOU DO NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE 1969 REVISION. MOREOVER, THE 1969 REVISION, IN ANY EVENT, MAY NOT OPERATE RETROACTIVELY TO REVIVE ANY ENTITLEMENT WHICH HAS EXPIRED UNDER THE EARLIER REVISION.

THE REGULATIONS INVOLVED HAVING BEEN ISSUED PURSUANT TO LAW ARE STATUTORY IN NATURE AND MAY NOT BE WAIVED OR EXTENDED.

ACCORDINGLY, THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM IS SUSTAINED.