B-233427.2, Sep 6, 1989

B-233427.2: Sep 6, 1989

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL - Relocation - Residence transaction expenses - Reimbursement - Eligibility - Permanent residences DIGEST: This summary letter decision addresses well established rules which have been discussed in previous Comptroller General decisions. Incident to a permanent change of station. /1/ That disallowance was based on the agency finding that the residence in Joliet was not his regular commuting residence in connection with his old permanent duty station when he was notified of his transfer on April 27. His parents declaring that his family residence in Joliet was his commuting residence on and before April 27. The dates on the automobile repair receipts were May 12 and May 15.

B-233427.2, Sep 6, 1989

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL - Relocation - Residence transaction expenses - Reimbursement - Eligibility - Permanent residences DIGEST: This summary letter decision addresses well established rules which have been discussed in previous Comptroller General decisions. To locate substantive decisions addressing this issue, refer to decisions indexed under the above listed index entry.

Kevin P. Marek:

Mr. Marek, an employee of the Department of the Air Force, requests reconsideration of our determination which disallowed his claim for real estate expense reimbursement incurred in selling his family residence in Joliet, Illinois, incident to a permanent change of station. /1/ That disallowance was based on the agency finding that the residence in Joliet was not his regular commuting residence in connection with his old permanent duty station when he was notified of his transfer on April 27, 1987.

In an effort to refute that agency finding, Mr. Marek has submitted signed statements from himself, his wife, and his parents declaring that
his family residence in Joliet was his commuting residence on and before
April 27, 1987.
He also supplied copies of receipts for service performed
on his automobile in Joliet in an attempt to demonstrate he commuted from
Joliet to his old duty station, approximately 94 miles one-way.

The dates on the automobile repair receipts were May 12 and May 15, 1987,
and while the recorded mileage does reflect travel consistent with the
commuting distance claimed by Mr. Marek, this evidence does not establish
that he commuted daily between Joliet and his old permanent duty station
on and before April 27, 1987.
As to the statement of Mr. Marek's wife and
his parents, they all merely reiterate the prior unsupported statements of
Mr. Marek and do not disprove the validity of the agency finding.
Accordingly, we sustain the earlier action disallowing the claim.