|
Off-site Links To Legislation and Other Information |
THOMAS.gov Bill Data--The Library of Congress |
Non-partisan Budget & Spending Information |
The White House |
National and International Resources We Use |
Does Your Opinion Match the Polls? |
|
Legislation News & Report (TM) TheWeekInCongress.com (TM) Managing America: Government Procedures
|
|||||||||||||||
|
TheWeekInCongress.com (TM) Week Ending November 20, 2009
S.1825 A bill to extend the authority for relocation expenses test programs for Federal employees, and for other purposes.
The bill makes permanent the authority for a relocation expenses test program for federal employees upon the request of the agency administering the program and increases the number of test programs that can be simultaneously operated to 12.
Test programs are limited to 4 years and test alternative methods of compensating employees for relocation and travel expenses.
CBO explained, “Existing regulations for federal travel require that certain relocation expenses must be reimbursed. Such expenses include transportation costs and per diem for travel to the employee’s new duty station, real estate sales and settlement expenses, and the costs to transport and store household goods. Under the regulations, other expenses may be reimbursed at an agency’s discretion, including costs associated with finding a home, securing temporary quarters, and using a relocation service company.
Since the test program authority was introduced in 1998, one agency’s program has been Completed and six others are currently operating. Most of the test programs allow employees being transferred to a new location to choose to pay for their own moving expenses using a predetermined lump-sum payment from the government rather than submitting expense reports for those expenses.”
Sponsor: Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) Vote: Passed Senate by voice vote. On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, Agreed to in the House by voice vote. Cost to the taxpayers: “CBO estimates that any additional administrative costs or savings from continuing to operate such programs would be small; the net impact on the federal budget would not be significant.” Earmark Certification: ## All Rights Reserved. © 2009 TheWeekInCongress.com(TM) No reproduction, language translation or distribution without written permission from TheWeekInCongress.com.(TM)
MORE INFORMATION
All Rights Reserved. © 2009 TheWeekInCongress.com(TM) No reproduction, language translation or distribution without written permission from TheWeekInCongress.com.(TM)
|
|
||||||||||||||