B-175231, MAR 30, 1972

B-175231: Mar 30, 1972

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

THE CIRCUMSTANCES INDICATE THAT IT WAS REASONABLE FOR HIM TO CONCLUDE THAT HIS TRANSFER WAS IMMINENT. THE QUESTION PRESENTED IS WHETHER REIMBURSEMENT OF THE REAL ESTATE EXPENSES MAY BE AUTHORIZED IN VIEW OF THE FACT MR. THE SALE MUST TAKE PLACE AFTER THE EMPLOYEE IS DEFINITELY INFORMED THAT HE IS TO BE TRANSFERRED. THAT BY DECEMBER 1970 IT WAS CLEAR THAT HE WOULD BE REASSIGNED TO PLACERVILLE. IT WAS ALSO CLEAR MUCH EARLIER THAT MR. GISSIBL WOULD HAVE TO BE TRANSFERRED FROM QUINCY. IT WAS REASONABLE FOR MR. GISSIBL TO CONCLUDE THAT AS OF JANUARY 1971 HIS TRANSFER OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION WAS IMMINENT. WE BELIEVE THERE WAS SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS REFERRED TO ABOVE AND THAT HE IS ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT OF OTHERWISE PROPER REAL ESTATE EXPENSES.

B-175231, MAR 30, 1972

CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE - TRANSFER OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION - REIMBURSEMENT OF REAL ESTATE COSTS - ENTITLEMENT DECISION ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF RICHARD P. GISSIBL FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF REAL ESTATE COSTS INCURRED IN THE SALE OF HIS RESIDENCE INCIDENT TO A TRANSFER OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION FROM QUINCY TO PLACERVILLE, CALIF. ALTHOUGH MR. GISSIBL SOLD HIS RESIDENCE PRIOR TO OFFICIAL NOTICE OF THE TRANSFER AND CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 4.1D OF OMB CIRCULAR NO. A-56, THE CIRCUMSTANCES INDICATE THAT IT WAS REASONABLE FOR HIM TO CONCLUDE THAT HIS TRANSFER WAS IMMINENT. ACCORDINGLY, THE VOUCHER MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.

TO MR. PAUL J. GRAINGER:

WE REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 25, 1972, REQUESTING OUR DECISION AS TO WHETHER THE ENCLOSED VOUCHER MAY BE PROPERLY CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT IN FAVOR OF MR. RICHARD P. GISSIBL, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,846.70, REPRESENTING REAL ESTATE COSTS INCURRED IN THE SALE OF HIS RESIDENCE AT QUINCY, CALIFORNIA, INCIDENT TO A TRANSFER OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION FROM QUINCY TO PLACERVILLE, CALIFORNIA.

THE QUESTION PRESENTED IS WHETHER REIMBURSEMENT OF THE REAL ESTATE EXPENSES MAY BE AUTHORIZED IN VIEW OF THE FACT MR. GISSIBL SOLD HIS RESIDENCE IN JANUARY 1971 BUT DID NOT RECEIVE OFFICIAL NOTICE OF HIS TRANSFER UNTIL MARCH 1971. SECTION 4.1D OF OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56, REVISED JUNE 26, 1969, REQUIRES THAT, IN ORDER FOR THE EXPENSES OF THE SALE OF THE RESIDENCE AT THE OLD DUTY STATION TO BE REIMBURSABLE, THE SALE MUST TAKE PLACE AFTER THE EMPLOYEE IS DEFINITELY INFORMED THAT HE IS TO BE TRANSFERRED.

THE RECORD, WHICH INCLUDES STATEMENTS OF THE PERSONNEL OFFICER AND MR. GISSIBL'S SUPERVISOR AT QUINCY, SHOWS THAT THE PERSONNEL OFFICE BEGAN ACTION TO REASSIGN MR. GISSIBL IN APRIL 1970, 4 MONTHS BEFORE THE COMPLETION OF HIS PROJECT AT QUINCY IN AUGUST 1970, AND THAT BY DECEMBER 1970 IT WAS CLEAR THAT HE WOULD BE REASSIGNED TO PLACERVILLE. APPARENTLY, IT WAS ALSO CLEAR MUCH EARLIER THAT MR. GISSIBL WOULD HAVE TO BE TRANSFERRED FROM QUINCY. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS REASONABLE FOR MR. GISSIBL TO CONCLUDE THAT AS OF JANUARY 1971 HIS TRANSFER OF OFFICIAL DUTY STATION WAS IMMINENT. SINCE MR. GISSIBL SOLD HIS RESIDENCE ONLY AFTER THE EXTENDED PERIOD OF ADMINISTRATIVE EFFORT TO RELOCATE HIM HAD, IN THE MINDS OF ALL CONCERNED, REACHED A SUCCESSFUL CONCLUSION, WE BELIEVE THERE WAS SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS REFERRED TO ABOVE AND THAT HE IS ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT OF OTHERWISE PROPER REAL ESTATE EXPENSES. SEE B-170800, DECEMBER 22, 1970, AND B-165796, FEBRUARY 12, 1969, COPIES ENCLOSED.

THE VOUCHER, WHICH IS RETURNED WITH THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.