About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-193969 1 (1980-06-05)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadiib0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 0o THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL DECISION * OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON. 0.C. 2o48 FILE: B-193969 DATE: June 5, 1980 MATTER OF: Sandra A. Cossu ouse Hunting Trip Expenses DIGEST: Whenan employee accepts a transfer and, after making a trip to the new station for purposes of finding permanent quarters, declines the transfer, she majr not be reimbursed amounts expended for travel incident to such a trip. This action concerns a reque-sb.t y the Chief, Accounting Section, Southwest Region, Infernal Revenue Service for an advance decision whether a claim by Sandra A. Cossu for travel expenses for a house hunting trip may be paid. The record reveals that on November 7, 1978, an authorization was issued and approved for a change of the permanent duty station of Mrs. Sandra A. Cossu from Los Angeles, California, to Dallas, Texas. Mrs. Cossu, after executing a service agreement on October 26, 1978, was authorized a house hunting trip for herself and her spouse which was begun on November 23, 1978. On November 27, 1978, while on her house hunting trip, Mrs. Cossu advised her prospective supervisor that she was unable to accept the offered position for personal reasons. Section 5724a(a)(2) of title 5 of the United States Code author- izes an employee reimbursement of transportation expenses to seek permanent quarters at the new official station when both the old and new stations are located within the continental United States. The pertinent parts of the implementing Federal Travel Regulations (FTR), are found in sections 2-4. 3a and 2-1. 5a(l)(a). The first sentence of FTR 2-1. 5a(1)(a) requires the employee to execute a service agreement as a condition precedent to the payment of relocation expenses. The record in the present case indicates that on October 26, 1978, the employee signed a service agreement, thus complying with this condition. The second sentence of FTR 2-1. 5a(l)(a) specifies that failure by the employee to effect the transfer may constitute a violation of the service agreement and that funds expended by the United States for travel, transportation and allowances shall be recovered from the employee. The record in the present case indicates that the employee, subsequent to execution of the service agreement, for personal reasons declined to effect the transfer.

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:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most