B-174804, FEB 14, 1972

B-174804: Feb 14, 1972

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

ERICKSON: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED DECEMBER 20. BRECKENRIDGE WAS AUTHORIZED A CHANGE OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION FROM PROVO. 1970 WAS RECEIVED FROM THE COMMISSIONER. SINCE FUNDS TO PAY HIS TRANSFER EXPENSES AND SALARY WERE NOT AVAILABLE. THE TRANSFER WAS INDEFINITELY POSTPONED BY VERBAL COMMUNICATION. *** "THE NEW OWNERS OF THE RESIDENCE HE SOLD IN PROVO PERMITTED MR. IT WAS NECESSARY TO RENT A HOME ON A TEMPORARY BASIS. ALL HOUSEHOLD GOODS WERE MOVED AND STORED IN THE GARAGE OF THE RENTED HOME UNTIL THE ACTUAL MOVE TO DURANGO WAS ACCOMPLISHED.". BRECKENRIDGE WAS NOTIFIED VIA TELETYPE THAT FEBRUARY 21. WAS THE NEW TRANSFER DATE. BRECKENRIDGE IS CLAIMING $737.00 FOR THE FIRST MOVE OF HIS HOUSEHOLD GOODS FROM HIS RESIDENCE AT 563 EAST 300 NORTH.

B-174804, FEB 14, 1972

CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE - REIMBURSEMENT - TRANSFER EXPENSES DECISION DISALLOWING A CLAIM OF EDISON C. BRECKENRIDGE FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF ADDITIONAL EXPENSES AND INCONVENIENCE INCIDENT TO THE DELAYED AUTHORIZATION OF A CHANGE OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION. CLAIMANT HAS ALREADY RECEIVED THE MAXIMUM REIMBURSEMENT FOR TEMPORARY QUARTERS EXPENSES ALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 2.5 OF OMB CIRCULAR NO. A-56, AND HIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT OF THE COST DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RENT AND MONTHLY HOUSE PAYMENTS MUST BE DENIED. FURTHER, OMB CIRCULAR NO. A-56 ONLY CONTEMPLATES REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES ACTUALLY INCURRED. SINCE THE AMOUNT CLAIMED FOR STORAGE AND TRANSPORTATION OF GOODS DOES NOT REPRESENT AN ACTUAL COST, THERE EXISTS NO AUTHORITY FOR SUCH REIMBURSEMENT.

TO MR. R. T. ERICKSON:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED DECEMBER 20, 1971, WITH ENCLOSURES, REFERENCE 4-360, REQUESTING OUR DECISION AS TO WHETHER A CLAIM IN THE AMOUNT OF $827 SUBMITTED BY MR. EDISON C. BRECKENRIDGE, AN EMPLOYEE OF YOUR AGENCY, MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED.

THE RECORD INDICATES THAT BY TRAVEL AUTHORIZATION NO. R4-71-46, DATED OCTOBER 28, 1970, MR. BRECKENRIDGE WAS AUTHORIZED A CHANGE OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION FROM PROVO, UTAH, TO DURANGO, COLORADO, THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS TRANSFER BEING SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 29, 1970. PURSUANT TO THIS NOTICE OF TRANSFER, MR. BRECKENRIDGE SOLD HIS RESIDENCE AT THE OLD DUTY STATION ON NOVEMBER 16, 1970. THE RECORD FURTHER INDICATES THAT:

" *** A TELETYPE DATED NOVEMBER 20, 1970 WAS RECEIVED FROM THE COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, WASHINGTON, D. C., STATING THAT CERTAIN FUNDS FOR THE DURANGO PROJECTS OFFICE HAD BEEN PLACED IN BUDGETARY RESERVE BY THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET FOR AN UNDETERMINED LENGTH OF TIME. SINCE FUNDS TO PAY HIS TRANSFER EXPENSES AND SALARY WERE NOT AVAILABLE, THE TRANSFER WAS INDEFINITELY POSTPONED BY VERBAL COMMUNICATION. ***

"THE NEW OWNERS OF THE RESIDENCE HE SOLD IN PROVO PERMITTED MR. BRECKENRIDGE TO RETAIN POSSESSION UNTIL JANUARY 11, 1971. SINCE AT THAT TIME A DETERMINATION STILL COULD NOT BE MADE AS TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF HIS TRANSFER, IT WAS NECESSARY TO RENT A HOME ON A TEMPORARY BASIS. ALL HOUSEHOLD GOODS WERE MOVED AND STORED IN THE GARAGE OF THE RENTED HOME UNTIL THE ACTUAL MOVE TO DURANGO WAS ACCOMPLISHED."

ON FEBRUARY 13, 1971, MR. BRECKENRIDGE WAS NOTIFIED VIA TELETYPE THAT FEBRUARY 21, 1971, WAS THE NEW TRANSFER DATE.

MR. BRECKENRIDGE HAS NOW SUBMITTED A SUPPLEMENTAL CLAIM REPRESENTING THOSE EXPENSES FOR WHICH HE FEELS REIMBURSEMENT SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN VIEW OF THE INCONVENIENCE AND UNFORSEEN DELAY ATTENDANT WITH HIS TRANSFER.

IN YOUR ANALYSIS OF THE CLAIM HERE INVOLVED, YOU STATED:

"MR. BRECKENRIDGE IS CLAIMING $737.00 FOR THE FIRST MOVE OF HIS HOUSEHOLD GOODS FROM HIS RESIDENCE AT 563 EAST 300 NORTH, PROVO, UTAH TO STORAGE AT HIS RENTED RESIDENCE, 556 EAST 300 NORTH, PROVO, UTAH. HE WAS INFORMED AT THAT TIME THAT REIMBURSEMENT FOR SUCH A MOVE WAS QUESTIONABLE. ACCORDINGLY, HE DID NOT CONTRACT IT OUT AND AS A RESULT WEIGHT RECEIPTS FOR THE MOVE ARE NOT AVAILABLE. THE MOVE WAS ACCOMPLISHED IN SNOW MAKING NUMEROUS TRIPS USING A LARGE SLED. THE LATER PERMANENT TRANSFER TO DURANGO INVOLVED MOVING EXACTLY THE SAME ITEMS AS THE MOVE WITHIN PROVO. HE IS, THEREFORE, SUBMITTING AS EVIDENCE OF WEIGHT, COPIES OF THE OFFICIAL WEIGHT RECEIPTS FOR THE MOVE TO DURANGO.

"ALSO CLAIMED IS $90.00 WHICH IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOUSE PAYMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE RESIDENCE AT 563 EAST 300 NORTH, PROVO, AND RENT AT 556 EAST 300 NORTH, PROVO.

"BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR A-56 DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR RENT AND MOVEMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES AS PRESENTED. BECAUSE OF THE INCONVENIENCE AND ADDITIONAL EXPENSE THE EMPLOYEE WAS CAUSED THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT'S ACTION, I WILL APPRECIATE YOUR DECISION AS TO WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT HAS AN OBLIGATION TO REIMBURSE THE EMPLOYEE IN THIS CASE."

BY LETTER OF MAY 11, 1971, MR. BRECKENRIDGE STATED THE BASIS OF HIS CLAIM AS FOLLOWS:

"I FEEL THAT BECAUSE OF THE EXTRA WORK INVOLVED AND THE PERIOD OF INCONVENIENCE CAUSED BY THE UNEXPECTED TEMPORARY MOVE MADE NECESSARY BY THE DEFERMENT OF MY TRANSFER TO DURANGO, I SHOULD BE FINANCIALLY ASSISTED WITH THIS MOVE. *** "

THE RECORD INDICATES THAT MR. BRECKENRIDGE HAS ALREADY RECEIVED REIMBURSEMENT FOR 30 DAYS SUBSISTENCE EXPENSES WHILE OCCUPYING TEMPORARY QUARTERS AS WELL AS TRANSPORTATION OF 11,000 POUNDS HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES. HE HAS NOT RECEIVED, NOR DID HE ORIGINALLY CLAIM, ANY STORAGE COSTS INCURRED INCIDENT TO THE TRANSFER.

CONCERNING THAT PORTION OF MR. BRECKENRIDGE'S CLAIM PERTAINING TO THE COST DIFFERENCE IN OCCUPYING THE RENTED HOUSE AS OPPOSED TO THOSE MONTHLY HOUSE PAYMENTS HE MADE AT HIS FORMERLY OWNED RESIDENCE, IT IS OUR VIEW THAT THE NATURE OF SUCH CLAIM IS FOR EXPENSES INCURRED WHILE OCCUPYING TEMPORARY QUARTERS. THE RECORD INDICATES THAT MR. BRECKENRIDGE WAS AUTHORIZED 30 DAYS TEMPORARY QUARTERS EXPENSES AND HE HAS RECEIVED THE MAXIMUM REIMBURSEMENT FOR SUCH EXPENSES UNDER SECTION 2.5 OF OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56, REVISED OCTOBER 12, 1966, AS AMENDED. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO PROPER BASIS FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF THIS PORTION OF THE CLAIM.

WITH RESPECT TO MR. BRECKENRIDGE'S CLAIM FOR $737 REPRESENTING HIS ASSESSMENT OF THE COSTS HE WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED INCIDENT TO MOVING HIS HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS FROM HIS FORMERLY OWNED HOME TO THE GARAGE OF THE RENTED RESIDENCE FOR STORAGE UNTIL HIS TRANSFER WAS EFFECTED, WE NOTE THAT NO COSTS WERE ACTUALLY INCURRED BY HIM FOR SUCH TRANSPORTATION. ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF CIRCULAR NO. A-56 IS TO REIMBURSE A TRANSFERRED EMPLOYEE THOSE COSTS HE HAS INCURRED PURSUANT TO HIS TRANSFER. UNTIL THE EMPLOYEE HAS ACTUALLY INCURRED A REIMBURSABLE EXPENSE, THERE IS NO BASIS FOR ALLOWANCE OF ANY AMOUNT FOR STORAGE AND TRANSPORTATION TO THE POINT OF STORAGE.

ACCORDINGLY, ON THE BASIS OF THE PRESENT RECORD, MR. BRECKENRIDGE'S CLAIM MAY NOT BE ALLOWED. THE ENCLOSURES WITH YOUR LETTER ARE RETURNED HEREWITH.