About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

B-185440 1 (1976-07-13)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadcxd0001 and id is 1 raw text is:                              . THE  CClMPTROLLER GENERAL
 .CECISION         .        .  OF   THE UNITED         STATES
                               W VASHINGTON, D.0. 20548




  FILE:                               DATE:    JUL  13 1976

  MATTER OF:
                    Paul R. Thomas * Subsistence while occupying
                    temporary quarters
  DIGEST:
              Incident to transfer employee occupied residence which:.
              he was in process of purchasing. Employee reclaims
              subsistence while occupying temporary quarters denied by
              his agency.  Whether residence was temporary quarters
              for purpose of Federal Travel Regulations (FPMR 101-7)
              para. 2-5.2c (May 1973) is dependent upon employee's
              intent at time residence was occupied. Employee's
              claim may not be allowed since it is clear that he
              intended to occupy residence on permanent basis, notwith-
              standing he was negotiating for loan, all utilities were
              not hooked-up, and employee's action resulted in
              savings to Government.


     This action is at the request of Mr. James E. London, an
Adi.orized Certifying Officer of the Bureau of Prisons (Bureau). By
memorandum of November 19, 1975, Mr. London forwarded the claim of
Mr. Paul R. Thomas, an employee of the Bureau. Mr. Thomas claimed
20 days of subsistence while occupying temporary quarters for the
period that he occupied the residence which he was in the process of
purchasing.

     Mr. Thomas' original claim for 20 days' subsistence while
occupying temporary quarters was denied by the Bureau on the basis
of a decision of our Office, B-160904, March 7, 1967. In that
decision, this Office denied on employee's claim for subsistence
while occupying temporary quarters on the basis that the rental
quarters occupied were not temporary in that the employee had entered
into a rental agreement for the quarters while purchase arrangements
were being consummated.

     Mr. Thomas contends that the above-cited decision is not applicable.
He bases his statement on the following five reasons; the first four of
which are paraphrased and the fifth quoted in its entirety:

     1. It would have been extremely difficult to obtain alternate
        rental housing within the limits of the authorized allowance.

     2. By renting the residence prior to purchase, it was not necessary
        to place his household effects in storage, thus avoiding the
        additional expense associated therewith.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most