1JTPA regulations were revised in
1992. The pertinent program regulations for this case were last published in the 1992 edition of
the Code of Federal Regulations. The 1994 edition is cited for relevant repayment methods.
2There is a $2,000 disparity
between the ALJ's final allowed and disallowed costs, after adding the originally questioned
costs concerning Grays Harbor College and certain expenses improperly paid to a state official.
This last issue appears to have been resolved. D. and O. at 38, fn. 28. Since the sums specifically
excepted to by the Grant Officer pertain solely to the amount the ALJ waived and the sum paid to
Grays Harbor College, I will not consider the disparity.
3The Grant Officer also excepted
to the ALJ's failure to affirm a disallowance of ,201 paid to Grays Harbor College and $14,171
improperly paid for a former Commissioner's personal expenses. The State's Response to the
Grant Officer's exceptions indicated that the issue of the improperly paid expenses had
apparently been previously resolved. Since the Grant Officer's subsequent submissions to the
Secretary drops any mention of recovery of the Commissioner's improperly claimed
expenditures, I assume this matter is resolved.
4"Stand-in costs" as
defined by USDOL ETA Field Memorandum 7882 (Apr. 28, 1982) are previously unreported
costs which a grantee proposes to report in place of unallowable costs. In general, stand-in costs
are acceptable, at the Grant Officer's discretion, if they would have been allowable had they been
reported in place of the disallowed costs. Stand-in costs may be accepted if: (1) they are
allowable, and allocable to, the grant to which the disallowed costs apply; (2) were incurred in
support of grant activities during the grant period in which the disallowed costs were incurred;
(3) are properly documented; and (4) would not have been incurred in the absence of the
program. The issue of the allowability of excess costs as stand-in for disallowed costs was
discussed in Comptroller General (Comp. Gen.) Decision B-208871.2 (Fete 9, 1989). That
decision held that stand-in costs were to be considered at the time of audit resolution. The
amended 1992 JTPA regulations at 20 C.F.R. § 627.481(b)tl994) accords with the Comp.
Gen. decision. The amended regulations define stand-in costs as:
costs paid from non-Federal sources which a recipient proposes to substitute
for Federal costs which have been disallowed as a result of an audit or other review. In
order to be considered as valid substitutions, the costs (1) must have been reported by the
grantee as uncharged program costs under the same title and in the same year in which
the disallowed costs were incurred and (2) must have been incurred in compliance with
laws, regulations, and contractual provisions governing JTPA.
20 C.F.R. § 626.5 (1994).
The period in question in this case predates both the Comp. Gen. decision and the
amended JTPA regulations.
