B-165986, MAY 13, 1969
Highlights
HUNTER BASED UPON THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF WEIGHT FURNISHED BY HIM EXPLAINING THE ERROR WHICH WAS MADE IN COMPUTING THE WEIGHT OF HIS HOUSEHOLD GOODS THAT WERE TRANSPORTED IN THE U-HAUL TRUCK AS WAS INDICATED ON THE STATE OF COLORADO TAX RECEIPT NO. WHICH WAS ATTACHED TO VOUCHER NO. THE MATTER WAS THE SUBJECT OF OUR DECISION OF MARCH 11. THE EXPLANATION BY THE EMPLOYEE IS ACCEPTABLE TO US. WHICH EXEMPLIFY THE RULE WHICH IS FOR APPLICATION AT THIS POINT IN THIS CASE. THAT PORTION OF THE LATER LOT/S) WHICH CAUSES THE EXCESSIVE NET WEIGHT IS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COMPUTATIONS OF ALLOWANCES UNDER THE COMMUTED RATE SYSTEM. HUNTER WAS PAID $487.45 ON VOUCHER NO. THE RECLAIM VOUCHER WHICH IS RETURNED HEREWITH MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT ONLY FOR THE DIFFERENCE.
B-165986, MAY 13, 1969
TO MR. HAROLD J. FARRALL:
YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 15, 1969, ASKS WHETHER THE ENCLOSED RECLAIM VOUCHER FOR $222.86 MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT TO MR. FRANK A. HUNTER BASED UPON THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF WEIGHT FURNISHED BY HIM EXPLAINING THE ERROR WHICH WAS MADE IN COMPUTING THE WEIGHT OF HIS HOUSEHOLD GOODS THAT WERE TRANSPORTED IN THE U-HAUL TRUCK AS WAS INDICATED ON THE STATE OF COLORADO TAX RECEIPT NO. E 15025 DATED NOVEMBER 17, 1968, WHICH WAS ATTACHED TO VOUCHER NO. E-69-1020. THE MATTER WAS THE SUBJECT OF OUR DECISION OF MARCH 11, 1969, B-165986, TO YOU.
THE EXPLANATION BY THE EMPLOYEE IS ACCEPTABLE TO US. HOWEVER, RESPECTING THE SEPARATE COMPUTATIONS BY YOUR OFFICE AND BY MR. HUNTER ON THE RECLAIM VOUCHER, SEE THE ENCLOSED COPIES OF OUR DECISIONS B 138048 DATED JANUARY 30, 1959, AND B-153243 DATED MARCH 26, 1964, WHICH EXEMPLIFY THE RULE WHICH IS FOR APPLICATION AT THIS POINT IN THIS CASE. WHEN AN EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTS HIS HOUSEHOLD GOODS IN TWO OR MORE LOTS SEPARATELY ON DIFFERENT DAYS AND THE AGGREGATE NET WEIGHT OF ALL OF THE LOTS EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM NET WEIGHT ALLOWABLE AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE, THAT PORTION OF THE LATER LOT/S) WHICH CAUSES THE EXCESSIVE NET WEIGHT IS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COMPUTATIONS OF ALLOWANCES UNDER THE COMMUTED RATE SYSTEM. THE RULE DOES NOT PERMIT EXCLUSION OF PART OF A LARGER, EARLIER LOT AS SUGGESTED BY YOUR COMPUTTATION, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT MIGHT BE ADVANTAGEOUS EITHER TO THE GOVERNMENT OR TO THE EMPLOYEE BECAUSE OF A CHANGE (INCREASE OR DECREASE IN THE COMMUTED RATE) BECOMING EFFECTIVE IN THE MEANTIME.
APPLYING THE ABOVE RULES TO THE TWO LOTS TRANSPORTED ON NOVEMBER 17, 1968, THEIR AGGREGATE NET WEIGHT OF 9,580 POUNDS ALLOWABLE AT THE LESSER RATE THEN IN EFFECT WOULD LEAVE ONLY 1,420 POUNDS TO BE ALLOWABLE FROM THE LATER LOTS -- THE 980 POUNDS ON DECEMBER 1, 1968, AND ONLY 440 POUNDS OF THE 2,040 POUNDS TRANSPORTED ON DECEMBER 5, 1968 -- SUBJECT TO THE INCREASED COMMUTED RATE EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 21, 1968.
THUS, 9,580 POUNDS X $6.15 PER HUNDREDWEIGHT, OR $589.17, PLUS 1,420 POUNDS X $6.33 PER HUNDREDWEIGHT, OR $89.89, PLUS THE $8.25 SURCHARGE ALLOWABLE FOR 11,000 POUNDS, A TOTAL OF $687.31 WOULD BE ALLOWABLE BASED UPON THE PRESENT EVIDENCE OF WEIGHT.
SINCE MR. HUNTER WAS PAID $487.45 ON VOUCHER NO. E-69-1020 FOR TRANSPORTATION OF HIS HOUSEHOLD GOODS ON THE ABOVE DATES, THE RECLAIM VOUCHER WHICH IS RETURNED HEREWITH MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT ONLY FOR THE DIFFERENCE, $199.86.