B-177237, MAR 2, 1973

B-177237: Mar 2, 1973

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

SINCE THE AMOUNT REIMBURSED FOR THE SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS EXCEEDS THE AMOUNT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWABLE FOR MOVING THE MOBILE HOME. HANNEBRINK: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 6. HENKE WAS TRANSFERRED FROM BAKERSFIELD. THE UNIT WHICH IS 60 FEET LONG AND 24 FEET WIDE BECOMES 12 FEET WIDE FOR TRANSPORTING AND NECESSITATES THE REMOVAL OF SOME FURNISHINGS AND ALL APPLIANCES. IT IS STATED THAT THE WEIGHT OF THE MOBILE HOME WITHOUT APPLIANCES AND OTHER PERSONAL EFFECTS VERY NEARLY REACHES THE MAXIMUM WEIGHT ALLOWED FOR TRANSPORTATION IN SOME STATES. THE CODE FOR CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS ON THIS TYPE OF MOBILE HOME WAS APPARENTLY INADEQUATE TO ALLOW MOVEMENT WITH THE APPLIANCES REMAINING INSIDE.

B-177237, MAR 2, 1973

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL - TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSE TRAILER - REIMBURSEMENT DECISION DENYING CERTIFICATION FOR PAYMENT OF A VOUCHER IN THE AMOUNT OF $549.65 IN FAVOR OF VIRGIL L. HENKE REPRESENTING COSTS OF TRANSPORTING, DISASSEMBLING, AND REASSEMBLING HIS MOBILE HOME INCIDENT TO A CHANGE OF STATION. IT HAS CONSISTENTLY BEEN HELD THAT UNDER SECTION 9 OF OMB CIRCULAR NO. A- 56 AN EMPLOYEE MAY RECEIVE A PAYMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THE SHIPMENT AND STORAGE OF HIS HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS OR FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF A HOUSE TRAILER, BUT NOT FOR BOTH. SEE 51 COMP. GEN. 27 (1971). SINCE THE AMOUNT REIMBURSED FOR THE SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS EXCEEDS THE AMOUNT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWABLE FOR MOVING THE MOBILE HOME, MR. HENKE HAS BEEN PAID ON THE BASIS MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO HIM. NO ENTITLEMENT EXISTS FOR ANY ADDITIONAL ALLOWANCE.

TO MRS. LILA B. HANNEBRINK:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 6, 1972, WITH ENCLOSURES, REFERENCE 1382 (D-832), REQUESTING OUR DECISION WHETHER YOU MAY CERTIFY THE ENCLOSED VOUCHER IN THE AMOUNT OF $549.65 IN FAVOR OF MR. VIRGIL L. HENKE REPRESENTING COSTS OF TRANSPORTING, DISASSEMBLING AND REASSEMBLING HIS MOBILE HOME INCIDENT TO A PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION.

THE INFORMATION FURNISHED SHOWS THAT MR. HENKE WAS TRANSFERRED FROM BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA, TO BISHOP, CALIFORNIA. MR. HENKE OWNS AN EXPANDO TYPE MOBILE HOME WHICH TELESCOPES IN PREPARATION FOR TRANSPORTING. THE UNIT WHICH IS 60 FEET LONG AND 24 FEET WIDE BECOMES 12 FEET WIDE FOR TRANSPORTING AND NECESSITATES THE REMOVAL OF SOME FURNISHINGS AND ALL APPLIANCES. IT IS STATED THAT THE WEIGHT OF THE MOBILE HOME WITHOUT APPLIANCES AND OTHER PERSONAL EFFECTS VERY NEARLY REACHES THE MAXIMUM WEIGHT ALLOWED FOR TRANSPORTATION IN SOME STATES. THE CODE FOR CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS ON THIS TYPE OF MOBILE HOME WAS APPARENTLY INADEQUATE TO ALLOW MOVEMENT WITH THE APPLIANCES REMAINING INSIDE.

YOU STATE THAT FOR MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES YOU HAVE REIMBURSED MR. HENKE HIS MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE $281.60 WHICH WAS HIS 2-WEEK GROSS SALARY. THIS DID NOT COVER HIS ACTUAL COST FOR THE "SET-UP KIT" FOR THE MOBILE HOME ($375) IN ADDITION TO OTHER EXPENSES. YOU HAVE ALSO ALLOWED $391.68 FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE HOUSEHOLD GOODS UNDER THE COMMUTED RATE SYSTEM IN LIEU OF AUTHORIZED REIMBURSEMENT FOR MOVING OF THE MOBILE HOME, $175.65 (PERMIT - $12.50 PLUS 251 MILES AT 65 CENTS PER MILE, $163.15) AS THE ALLOWANCE ON THE COMMUTED RATE SYSTEM WAS TO THE ADVANTAGE OF THE EMPLOYEE.

YOU POINT OUT THAT MR. HENKE'S TOTAL ACTUAL EXPENSES WERE $948.83 AND URGE THAT ON A COMPARATIVE BASIS HAD BUT 9,000 POUNDS (A WEIGHT ARBITRARILY SELECTED) OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS BEEN SHIPPED AND REIMBURSEMENT MADE ON A COMMUTED BASIS THE COST WOULD HAVE BEEN $1,278. IT APPEARS TO BE YOUR POSITION THAT SINCE THE ACTUAL EXPENSES OF THE MOVEMENT OF THE MOBILE HOME AND HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES HERE INVOLVED WERE LESS THAN THE LIABILITY OF THE GOVERNMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN HAD A SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS ONLY BEEN MADE, PAYMENT OF THE CLAIM WOULD BE JUSTIFIED. THIS POSITION IS NOT TENABLE FOR THE REASONS HEREINAFTER STATED.

THE TRAVEL AUTHORIZATION DATED JANUARY 31, 1972, AUTHORIZED SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND PERSONAL EFFECTS OR SHIPMENT OF A MOBILE HOME IN LIEU OF SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS NOT TO EXCEED THE COST OF SHIPPING 11,000 POUNDS AND 60-DAY STORAGE COST. SECTION 9 OF OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56, REVISED AUGUST 17, 1971, CONTAINS BINDING REGULATIONS WITH REGARD TO PAYMENT BY THE GOVERNMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSE TRAILERS AND PROVIDES IN PART AS FOLLOWS:

"A. ELIGIBILITY. AN EMPLOYEE WHO IS ENTITLED TO TRANSPORTATION OF HIS HOUSEHOLD GOODS UNDER THESE REGULATIONS SHALL, IN LIEU OF SUCH TRANSPORTATION, BE ENTITLED TO AN ALLOWANCE, AS PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION, FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF A MOBILE HOME FOR USE AS A RESIDENCE. ***"

IT HAS CONSISTENTLY BEEN HELD THAT UNDER THE CITED REGULATORY PROVISION AN EMPLOYEE MAY RECEIVE A PAYMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THE SHIPMENT AND STORAGE OF HIS HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS OR FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF A HOUSE TRAILER, BUT NOT FOR BOTH. SEE 51 COMP. GEN. 27 (1971) AND DECISIONS CITED THEREIN. SINCE THE AMOUNT REIMBURSED BY YOUR OFFICE FOR THE SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS EXCEEDS THE AMOUNT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWABLE FOR MOVING THE MOBILE HOME, MR. HENKE HAS BEEN PAID ON THE BASIS MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO HIM. NO ENTITLEMENT EXISTS FOR ANY ADDITIONAL ALLOWANCE.

ACCORDINGLY, THE VOUCHER WHICH IS RETURNED MAY NOT BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT.