Request for Expenses and Failure To Fulfill Government Service Agreement

A former employee claimed return travel and transportation expenses following a period of official duty in Alaska. The employee fulfilled the 12-month Government service agreement in connection with her transfer to Alaska and was entitled to reimbursement for certain travel and transportation expenses incident to her transfer from Florida to Alaska. The employee's 12 months of service included a leave without pay (LWOP) of 3 months duration just prior to her resignation from Government service. The agency denied her claim for return travel and transportation expenses because she did not complete the 2-year tour of duty required by law. Agency regulations provide for separation before completion of the 2-year service period and entitlement to the return travel and transportation expenses when the reasons for the premature separation are beyond the employee's control and are otherwise acceptable to the agency. The employee stated that she was unable to complete the 2-year service period because of a series of factors allegedly beyond her control, which she presented to the agency at the time she requested LWOP. GAO found no provision in law that supported the employee's contention that the agency's approval of her request for LWOP must be translated into an expression of approval of alleged uncontrollable reasons for failing to fulfill a statutorily mandated Government service agreement. The granting of LWOP at an employee's request and the acceptance of early separation as beyond an employee's control are separate and distinct matters; administrative determinations of these matters are subject to altogether different evaluation processes. The GAO policy in regard to these matters has consistently been that the responsibility for determining whether an employee's separation from the service is for a reason beyond her control and acceptable to the agency concerned rests primarily with the employing agency. In this case, GAO believed that the agency's determination that the employee's separation was for reasons within her control was reasonable. Accordingly, the denial of the claim was sustained.