B-181412, OCT 2, 1975

B-181412, OCT 2, 1975

AN EMPLOYEE OF HUD TRANSFERRED FROM ONE PERMANENT DUTY STATION TO ANOTHER MAY NOT BE REIMBURSED FOR LODGING EXPENSES WHILE IN TEMPORARY QUARTERS WHERE HE CAN ONLY FURNISH HIS OWN STATEMENT AND AFFIDAVITS OF ACQUAINTANCES IN LIEU OF THE REQUIRED RECEIPTS. GAO WILL ONLY WAIVE REQUIREMENT THAT RECEIPTS BE FURNISHED FOR LODGING EXPENSES IN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES. IN THIS CASE THE LOSS OF THE RECEIPTS APPARENTLY OCCURRED ONLY AS A RESULT OF THE EMPLOYEE'S OWN NEGLIGENCE.

TERRY P. BYERS - REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSE OF LODGING WHERE RECEIPTS ARE LOST:

THIS ACTION IS IN RESPONSE TO A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF OUR ADVANCE DECISION OF FEBRUARY 5, 1975, WHICH HELD THAT AN EMPLOYEE TRANSFERRED FROM ONE PERMANENT DUTY STATION TO ANOTHER MAY GENERALLY NOT BE REIMBURSED FOR THE EXPENSES OF OCCUPYING TEMPORARY QUARTERS AT THE NEW STATION IN THE ABSENCE OF RECEIPTS, EVEN WHERE THE EMPLOYEE SUBMITS A NOTARIZED STATEMENT IN THEIR STEAD.

ONLY THE GENERAL FACTS NEED BE REPEATED HERE. MR. TERRY P. BYERS, AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SUBMITTED A VOUCHER DATED MAY 28, 1974, FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED IN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY OF 1973 INCIDENT TO HIS CHANGE OF PERMANENT DUTY STATION. REIMBURSEMENT FOR LODGING EXPENSES FOR THE INITIAL 14-DAY PERIOD OF TEMPORARY QUARTERS WAS DENIED BY THE CERTIFYING OFFICER AND SUBSEQUENTLY BY OUR DECISION SINCE NEITHER MR. BYERS NOR THE LODGING FACILITY COULD DOCUMENT THE EMPLOYEE'S RESIDENCE FOR THAT PERIOD BY OTHER THAN HIS OWN STATEMENT. BY REGULATIONS APPLICABLE AT THE TIME, VOUCHERS SUBMITTED FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF SUCH EXPENSES MUST BE SUPPORTED BY RECEIPTS. SEE SUBSECTION 8.4(B) OF OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (OMB) CIRCULAR NO. A-56, REVISED AUGUST 17, 1971, IN FORCE AT THE TIME IN QUESTION.

OUR ADVANCE DECISION HEREIN INDICATED THAT THE TERM "RECEIPT," AS USED IN OMB CIRCULAR NO. A-56, SUPRA, MEANS "A WRITING SIGNED BY THE PERSON FURNISHING SUCH LODGING ACKNOWLEDGING THAT HE HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT FOR SUCH LODGING," CITING B-176882, NOVEMBER 14, 1972. THE EMPLOYEE'S STATEMENT DID NOT SATISFY THAT DEFINITION OF "RECEIPT."

WITH HIS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION, MR. BYERS FURNISHED AFFIDAVITS OF THREE ACQUAINTANCES WHICH TEND TO CORROBORATE THAT HE DID OCCUPY AND PAY FOR THE QUARTERS FOR WHICH HE HAD SUBMITTED THE VOUCHER. BUT AGAIN, MR. BYERS' STATEMENT, EVEN ACCOMPANIED BY THE THREE AFFIDAVITS MENTIONED, DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A RECEIPT FOR THE PURPOSES OF REIMBURSEMENT UNDER THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS.

SUCH REIMBURSEMENT WITHOUT THE REQUIRED RECEIPTS HAS BEEN ALLOWED BY THIS OFFICE IN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES. AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WAS ALLOWED REIMBURSEMENT WHERE HIS LODGING RECEIPTS HAD BEEN MISPLACED AS A RESULT OF CONSTANT TRAVEL ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS. B 173312, OCTOBER 8, 1971. AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WAS ALLOWED REIMBURSEMENT WHERE HER RECEIPTS HAD BEEN STOLEN AND WHERE SHE FURNISHED A CORROBORATING POLICE REPORT. B 180242, APRIL 8, 1974. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE, HOWEVER, DO NOT INVOLVE FACTS WHICH WOULD SIMILARLY COMPEL THIS OFFICE TO ALLOW THE CLAIM. THE ONLY EXPLANATION FOR THE LOSS APPEARS TO BE MR. BYERS' OWN NEGLIGENCE IN WAITING APPROXIMATELY 15 MONTHS BEFORE SUBMITTING THE APPROPRIATE VOUCHERS.

ACCORDINGLY, THE CLAIM FOR LODGING FOR THE PERIOD IN QUESTION MAY NOT BE ALLOWED, AND OUR PRIOR DECISION ON THIS MATTER IS SUSTAINED.