Skip to main content

B-168126, FEB. 10, 1970

B-168126 Feb 10, 1970
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

A-56 THERE IS NO BASIS FOR REIMBURSEMENT. THE FACTS SET FORTH IN OUR SETTLEMENT ACTION WILL BE REPEATED HERE ONLY TO THE EXTENT REQUIRED TO CONSIDER YOUR APPEAL. WHICH IS ABOUT 7.1 MILES CLOSER TO YOUR NEW DUTY STATION IN WASHINGTON. IN CASES SUCH AS YOURS WHERE THE OLD AND NEW POSTS OF DUTY ARE ONLY A SHORT DISTANCE APART LIMITS AUTHORIZATION OF TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES AND APPLICABLE ALLOWANCES TO CASES WHERE THE EMPLOYING AGENCY DETERMINES THAT RELOCATION WAS INCIDENT TO TRANSFER OF OFFICIAL STATION. WE HAVE BEEN ADVISED THAT PRIOR TO YOUR MOVE. WELFARE (HEW) APPROVED CRITERIA IN CONNECTION WITH SHORT MOVES IN THE SAME METROPOLITAN AREA FOR USE IN DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT AN EMPLOYEE'S CHANGE OF RESIDENCE WAS REASONABLY RELATED TO THE CHANGE OF HIS DUTY STATION.

View Decision

B-168126, FEB. 10, 1970

CIVIL PAY--TRANSFERS--SHORT DISTANCES DECISION SUSTAINING DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES INCIDENT TO CHANGE OF STATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION EMPLOYEE FROM SILVER SPRING TO WASHINGTON. WHERE DEPARTMENT DETERMINED THAT CHANGE OF RESIDENCE RESULTED IN EMPLOYEE'S BEING 7.1 MILES CLOSER TO NEW DUTY STATION AND THAT SUCH MOVE DID NOT COME WITHIN CRITERIA FOR COVERAGE UNDER SECTION 1.3A, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56 THERE IS NO BASIS FOR REIMBURSEMENT.

TO MR. JOSEPH C. CISSELL:

YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 4, 1969, REQUESTS REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF AUGUST 21, 1969, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES AND APPLICABLE ALLOWANCES IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,396.99 INCIDENT TO YOUR CHANGE OF OFFICIAL STATION FROM SILVER SPRING, MARYLAND, TO WASHINGTON, D.C; AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.

THE FACTS SET FORTH IN OUR SETTLEMENT ACTION WILL BE REPEATED HERE ONLY TO THE EXTENT REQUIRED TO CONSIDER YOUR APPEAL.

YOU CLAIM THAT INCIDENT TO YOUR CHANGE OF STATION FROM SILVER SPRING TO WASHINGTON, D.C; YOU CHANGED YOUR RESIDENCE WITHIN SILVER SPRING FROM 12104 GOODHILL ROAD TO 1034 RUATAN STREET, WHICH IS ABOUT 7.1 MILES CLOSER TO YOUR NEW DUTY STATION IN WASHINGTON.

IN OUR CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACTION WE QUOTED IN PERTINENT PART FROM SECTION 1.3A OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56, AS AMENDED BY TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM NO. 1 OF APRIL 7, 1967. SECTION 1.3A, AS AMENDED, IN CASES SUCH AS YOURS WHERE THE OLD AND NEW POSTS OF DUTY ARE ONLY A SHORT DISTANCE APART LIMITS AUTHORIZATION OF TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES AND APPLICABLE ALLOWANCES TO CASES WHERE THE EMPLOYING AGENCY DETERMINES THAT RELOCATION WAS INCIDENT TO TRANSFER OF OFFICIAL STATION.

WE HAVE BEEN ADVISED THAT PRIOR TO YOUR MOVE, THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE (HEW) APPROVED CRITERIA IN CONNECTION WITH SHORT MOVES IN THE SAME METROPOLITAN AREA FOR USE IN DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT AN EMPLOYEE'S CHANGE OF RESIDENCE WAS REASONABLY RELATED TO THE CHANGE OF HIS DUTY STATION. THESE CRITERIA WERE NOT MANUALIZED BUT WERE USED BY SEVERAL OPERATING AGENCIES OF THE DEPARTMENT, INCLUDING THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, IN PLANNING FOR MASS MOVES IN THE WASHINGTON, D.C; AREA BECAUSE OF THE SCHEDULED MOVEMENT OF SEVERAL HEW OFFICES. THESE CRITERIA ARE AS FOLLOWS:

1. FOR EMPLOYEES WHO COMMUTED TO THEIR OLD DUTY STATION BY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION - THE ONE-WAY COMMUTING TIME FROM OLD RESIDENCE TO NEW DUTY STATION MUST BE:

A. AT LEAST 30 MINUTES GREATER THAN COMMUTING TIME FROM OLD RESIDENCE TO OLD DUTY STATION, AND

B. AT LEAST 30 MINUTES GREATER THAN COMMUTING TIME FROM NEW RESIDENCE TO NEW DUTY STATION.

2. FOR EMPLOYEES WHO COMMUTED TO THEIR OLD DUTY STATION BY AUTOMOBILE - THE USUALLY TRAVELED ONE-WAY ROUTE FROM OLD RESIDENCE TO NEW DUTY STATION MUST BE:

A. AT LEAST 10 MILES FURTHER THAN THE DISTANCE FROM OLD RESIDENCETO OLD DUTY STATION, AND

B. AT LEAST 10 MILES FURTHER THAN THE DISTANCE FROM RESIDENCE TO NEW DUTY STATION.

EVALUATED IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE CRITERIA, YOUR AGENCY HAS DETERMINED THAT YOUR RELOCATION WAS NOT INCIDENT TO YOUR CHANGE OF STATION.

WE SEE NO REASON FOR QUESTIONING THAT DETERMINATION WHICH APPEARS TO BE IN LINE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1.3A OF CIRCULAR NO. A-56, IN PART AS FOLLOWS:

"ORDINARILY, A RELOCATION OF RESIDENCE SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS INCIDENT TO A TRANSFER OF OFFICIAL STATION UNLESS THE ONE-WAY COMMUTING DISTANCE FROM THE OLD RESIDENCE TO THE NEW POST OF DUTY IS AT LEAST 10 MILES GREATER THAN FROM THE OLD RESIDENCE TO THE OLD POST OF DUTY. * *

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO SUSTAIN THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM.

THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF YOUR REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC INFORMATION ON HOW TO PREPARE AND CONDUCT AN APPEAL BEFORE A COURT WOULD INCLUDE LEGAL SERVICES NORMALLY PERFORMED BY YOUR ATTORNEY AND AS SUCH ARE NOT WITHIN OUR AUTHORIZED FUNCTIONS. HOWEVER, WE WILL BE GLAD TO MEET WITH YOU AND FURNISH YOU COPIES OF ANY PAPERS IN OUR FILES WHICH YOU FEEL MAY BE NECESSARY IN A COURT ACTION.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs