[Senate Report 109-289]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
109th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 109-289
_______________________________________________________________________
Calendar No. 528
TO EXTEND RELOCATION EXPENSES TEST PROGRAMS FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
to accompany
S. 2146
TO EXTEND RELOCATION EXPENSES TEST PROGRAMS FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
July 21, 2006.--Ordered to be printed
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2006
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CARL LEVIN, Michigan
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
TOM COBURN, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
Michael D. Bopp, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Jennifer A. Hemingway, Professional Staff Member
Joyce A. Rechtschaffen, Minority Staff Director and Counsel
Jason M. Yanussi, Minority Professional Staff Member
Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
I. Purpose & Summary...............................................00
II. Background......................................................00
III. Legslative History..............................................00
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis.....................................00
V. Estimated Cost of Legislation...................................00
VI. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact.................................00
VII. Changes in Existing Law.........................................00
Calendar No. 528
109th Congress
SENATE
Report
2d Session 109-289
======================================================================
TO EXTEND RELOCATION EXPENSES TEST PROGRAMS FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
_______
July 21, 2006.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Ms. Collins, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 2146]
The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 2146) to extend
relocation expenses test programs for Federal employees, having
considered the same reports favorably thereon and recommends
that the bill do pass.
I. Purpose and Summary
The purpose of S. 2146 is to extend the authority for the
General Services Administration to conduct relocation expenses
test programs for federal employees for an additional four
years. The original authority, enacted as part of the 1998
Travel and Transportation Reform Act,\1\ expired on October 20,
2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ P.L. 105-264; 112 Stat. 2350.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Background
The federal government provides worldwide relocation
assistance to approximately 28,000 federal civilian employees
each year under various relocation rules and regulations at an
estimated cost of more than $800 million.\2\ The relocation of
federal employees has traditionally been governed by the
Federal Travel Regulation (FTR),\3\ which implements the
statutory requirements \4\ and Executive branch policies for
relocation and travel by federal civilian employees and others
authorized to travel at government expense. The FTR is
promulgated by the Administrator of General Services. The
General Services Administration's relocation management policy
seeks to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the
federal government in providing or obtaining ``best value''
relocation services through the implementation of
governmentwide policies and tools.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Government Relocation Advisory Board, Findings and
Recommendations, September 2005, p. 2.
\3\ 41 CFR 300-304. Chapter 302 of the FTR contains federal
civilian relocation policies.
\4\ 5 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 5721 through 5739.
\5\ www.gsa.gov/relo
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under existing FTR requirements, certain relocation
expenses must be reimbursed, including transportation and per
diem for en route travel to the employee's new duty station,
miscellaneous expenses, residence transactions, and the
transportation and temporary storage of household goods.\6\ The
FTR also identifies expenses that may be reimbursed at agency
discretion, including costs associated with finding a home,
securing temporary quarters, and the use of a relocation
services company for guaranteed home sale and other
services.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Under the FTR regime, expenses for which the Agency is
responsible include: transportation and a per diem for employees and
immediate family members (Part 302-4); miscellaneous moving expenses
(Part 302-16); the transaction costs for the sale or purchase of the
new and old residences, or obtaining or breaking of a lease (Part 302-
11); transportation and temporary storage of household goods (Part 302-
7); extended storage of household goods (Part 302-8); and a relocation
income tax allowance (RITA).
\7\ These are items for which a relocating employee may be
compensated at the discretion of the relevant office. Discretionary
items include: house hunting (Part 302-5); temporary quarters
subsistence expense (Part 302-6); shipment of privately owned vehicle
(Part 302-9); property management services (Part 302-15) and home
marketing incentives (Part 302-14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reducing federal travel costs has been a longstanding goal
of the Congress. The Federal Employee Travel Reform Act if 1996
\8\ made improvements in federal travel and relocation
services. The Travel and Transportation Reform Act of 1998 \9\
authorized federal agencies to participate in travel pilot
tests expected to save taxpayer dollars.\10\ The authority was
limited to 10 pilot programs upon approval of the General
Services Administration. The Act requires agencies to include
in any request to the Administrator of General Services for
approval of such a test program an analysis of the expected
costs and benefits and a set of criteria for evaluating the
effectiveness of the program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ P.L. 104-201.
\9\ P.L. 105-264.
\10\ Senate Report 105-295.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of the authority provided by the Travel and Transportation Reform
Act of 1998
Currently, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) deploys more
than 30,000 front line personnel, including nearly 12,000
border patrol agents, at the ports and along the country's
borders to protect the nation against instruments of terror,
facilitate international trade and assist in other national
security efforts. CBP has found the average historical cost to
the federal government to move a border patrol agent to be
$72,000 under the FTR.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Report from CBP Acting Commissioner Deborah J. Spero to David
L. Bibb, Acting Administrator, General Services Administration,
February 9, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the seriousness of international threats escalated after
9/11, the Office of Border Patrol (OBP) within CBP identified a
need to relocate hundreds of agents to critical U.S. border
locations. Border patrol agents volunteered to transfer to
border locations deemed most vulnerable. Yet, the high cost of
these transfers limited CBP's ability to relocate agents in a
timely and cost-effective manner, and CBP sought alternative
funding sources.
In 2004 and 2005, CBP sought and received approval from GSA
to conduct two relocation expenses test pilot programs designed
to provide the Border Patrol greater flexibility to
expeditiously relocate agents at a significant savings. Under
both programs, transferees were fully responsible for arranging
their own moves, rather than submitting expense reports
supported by receipts, and received a predetermined single
payment to cover all expenses incurred from the move.\12\ The
lump-sum amount paid to relocating employees was dependent on
the agents' family status and ranged from $5,000 for relocation
of a single, nonhomeowner, to $20,000 for a multi-person
household owning a home. The programs, known as the Voluntary
Relocation Program and the Alternative Relocation Payment
Program, were developed through cooperative efforts with the
federal employee unions representing border patrol agents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Mandatory and discretionary reimbursable relocation expenses
are set out in the Federal Travel Regulation, Part 302.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The lump-sum payments have the added benefit of reducing
the administrative burden. CBP found that administrative
resources previously required to file and review detailed
vouchers and process payments were reduced. From April 2004
through September 2005, CBP processed 435 relocations at an
average cost of $16,888 per move, resulting in estimated
savings of $23,693,500 in relocation costs.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Report from CBP Acting Commissioner Deborah J. Spero to David
L. Bibb, Acting Administrator, General Services Administration,
February 9, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBP has adjusted the program to be more responsive to the
needs of its employees. For example, as a direct result of
input from participating employees, CBP increased the lump-sum
amounts by an incremental margin to offset the tax burden on
employees participating in the program.\14\ CBP's final report
to the General Services Administration on the pilot programs
indicate that participating employees appreciated the
additional flexibility provided by the program and expressed
interest in its continuation.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ In the initial survey of participating CBP employees, a small
minority expressed concern that the lump-sum payment was inadequate to
cover the costs of the move. Consequently, CBO increased the lump-sum
payment to offset the tax burden to $6,750, $13,500, $20,250, or
$27,000 according to the category of employee.
\15\ Report from CBP Acting Commissioner Deborah J. Spero to David
L. Bibb, Acting Administrator, General Services Administration,
February 9, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSA approved the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI)
Relocation Test Program in March 2003. The pilot program ended
in April 2005. In its September 2005 report, the Governmentwide
Relocation Advisory Board stated that the program ``has been
extremely successful in providing the FBI with the flexibility
in recruitment of vital private-sector personnel and the
authority to provide a myriad of relocation of benefits to fill
positions deemed critical in addressing the war on terrorism.''
\16\ The FBI reported a savings of more than $1.3 million with
878 employees electing the fixed-rate reimbursement under the
Relocation Test Program.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Government Relocation Advisory Board, Findings and
Recommendations, September 2005, p. 37.
\17\ Government Relocation Advisory Board, Findings and
Recommendations, September 2005, p. 37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The capability to efficiently relocate personnel, while
simultaneously minimizing costs, can be of significant benefit
to federal agencies as they continue to recruit and retain a
highly-skilled workforce. In its September 2005 report, the
Government Relocation Advisory Board concluded that employee
relocation should be completed in a cost-efficient manner and
in the shortest time practicable to allow the transferee to be
settled in the new location and focused on the new
assignment.\18\ The Committee hopes that agencies will avail
themselves of the relocation expenses test program authority as
part of their broader human capital plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Government Relocation Advisory Board, Findings and
Recommendations, September 2005, p. iv.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Legislative History
S. 2146 was introduced by Senators Collins, Lieberman, and
Akaka on December 20, 2005, and was referred to the Committee
on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. On January 27,
2006, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Oversight of
Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District
of Columbia, which favorably polled the legislation on April
21, 2006.
On June 15, 2006, the Committee considered S. 2146 and
ordered the bill reported favorably by voice vote without
amendment. Members present were Senators Collins, Voinovich,
Coleman, Coburn, Chafee, Bennett, Lieberman, Carper, Dayton,
and Pryor.
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1--Extension of Relocation Expenses Test Programs
(a) Amends 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5739 to strike the provision
limiting the relocation expenses test program to 24 months.
Extends the authority for agencies, upon approval of the
Administrator of General Services, to conduct relocation
expenses test programs for an additional four years.
(b) Provides that the amendments would take effect as
though enacted as part of the Travel and Transportation Reform
Act of 1998.
V. Estimated Cost of Legislation
June 30, 2006.
Hon. Susan M. Collins,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S.
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Madam Chairman: As you requested, the Congressional
Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S.
2146, a bill to extend relocation expenses test programs for
federal employees.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew
Pickford.
Sincerely,
Donald B. Marron,
Acting Director.
Enclosure.
S. 2146--A bill to extend relocation expenses test programs for federal
employees
With the approval of the General Services Administration
(GSA), federal agencies were able to test new and innovative
methods of reimbursing their employees for travel and
relocation expenses without seeking a waiver of current rules
or law prior to the start of fiscal year 2005. (The authority
for such relocation expense test programs expired on October
20, 2005.) S. 2146 would reauthorize the relocation expenses
test program until October 20, 2009.
CBO estimates that implementing S. 2146 would reduce
federal administrative expenses associated with employee
reimbursement by about $15 million annually, assuming amounts
provided in appropriation acts are correspondingly reduced.
Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending or
revenues. S. 2146 contains no intergovernmental or private-
sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
and would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
Under existing Federal Travel Regulation (FTR)
requirements, certain relocation expenses must be reimbursed,
including transportation and per diem for travel to the
employee's new duty station, real estate sales and settlement
expenses, and the transportation and storage of household
goods. Other expenses that may be reimbursed at an agency's
discretion are costs associated with finding a home, securing
temporary quarters, and the use of a relocation service
company.
Before authority to operate a relocation expenses test
program expired, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation each initiated a voluntary
relocation program. Those programs allowed employees being
transferred to arrange and pay for their own moves using a
predetermined lump-sum payment rather than submitting expense
reports to obtain reimbursement. Based on information from GSA,
CBO estimates that the two agencies reduced moving costs by
about $15 million annually by implementing test programs
outside of the requirements of the FTR. Assuming a similar
level of participation, CBO estimates that implementing S. 2146
would reduce relocation costs by about $15 million a year.
Those savings would be achieved only to the extent that amounts
provided in appropriation acts are correspondingly reduced.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew
Pickford. This estimate was approved by Jeffrey Holland, Chief,
Projections Unit.
VI. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact
Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has
considered the regulatory impact of this bill. CBO states that
there are no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and no costs on
state, local, or tribal governments. The legislation contains
no other regulatory impact.
VII. Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic and existing law, in which no
change is proposed, is shown in roman):
TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE: GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES
PART III--EMPLOYEES
SUBPART D--PAY AND ALLOWANCES
CHAPTER 57--TRAVEL, TRANSPORTATION, AND SUBSISTENCE
SUBCHAPTER II--TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES, NEW APPOINTEES,
STUDENT TRAINEES, AN6 TRANSFERRED EMPLOYEES
5739. Authority for relocation expenses test programs.
(a)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this
subchapter, under a test program which the Administrator of
General Services determines to be in the interest of the
Government and approves, an agency may pay through the proper
disbursing official [for a period not to exceed 24 months] any
necessary relocation expenses in lieu of any payment otherwise
authorized or required under this subchapter. An agency shall
include in any request to the Administrator of such a test
program an analysis of the expected costs and benefits and a
set of criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of the
program.
* * * * * * *
(e) The authority to conduct test programs under this
program shall expire [7 years] 11 years after the date of
enactment of the Travel and Transportation Reform Act of 1998.
* * * * * * *