HB6330 adds a new authority to the federal relocation framework. It creates a one-time lump-sum relocation payment for employees who relocate in the Government’s interest, in place of other relocation payments under Subchapter II of Chapter 57 of title 5.
The head of the agency or a designee may authorize the lump sum through the proper disbursing official, with the amount and governing process to be set by regulations. The Administrator of General Services is tasked with prescribing those regulations, including when the lump sum may be paid, how the amount is calculated, and the dispute and appeal process for relocation expenses.
At a Glance
What It Does
Adds 5 U.S.C. § 5739a to authorize a one-time lump-sum relocation payment to employees relocating for the Government’s interests, in lieu of other relocation payments.
Who It Affects
Federal agencies’ HR and payroll offices, proper disbursing officials, and federal employees who relocate in the Government’s interest.
Why It Matters
Creates a streamlined, single-payment mechanism and a regulatory framework to govern eligibility, calculation, and dispute resolution, potentially reducing administrative complexity while shifting cost mechanics to standard-regulation processes.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill creates a new relocation payment authority for federal employees who relocate at the Government’s direction. It adds a new section to title 5 that allows agencies to provide a one-time lump-sum payment instead of the usual set of relocation benefits.
The agency head or their designee may authorize this payment through the normal disbursement channels. Regulations to implement the new authority will be issued by the General Services Administration, covering when the lump sum can be paid, how the amount is calculated, and how employees can challenge relocation expense decisions, including an appeal path to the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals.
In addition, the statute requires a clerical amendment to insert the new section into the table of sections. The net effect is to replace a portion of the traditional relocation benefits with a single, regulated lump-sum option while preserving an avenue for dispute resolution.
The regime aims to balance administrative efficiency with protections for employees through a formal appeal process.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill creates 5 U.S.C. § 5739a, authorizing a lump-sum relocation payment.
The lump sum is payable in lieu of other relocation benefits under Subchapter II.
Regulations by the General Services Administration will set eligibility, calculation, and disputes.
Employees can dispute relocation expenses with their agency and may appeal to the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals.
A clerical amendment inserts the new section into the table of sections for Subchapter II.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Authority for lump-sum relocation payment
This provision authorizes a one-time lump-sum relocation payment to an employee who relocates in the Government’s interest. The payment is in lieu of any other relocation payments that would otherwise be authorized or required under Subchapter II, signaling a shift from multiple per-diem or cost-reimbursement components to a single consolidated sum. The authority applies when the agency head (or a designee) approves the move and directs disbursement through the proper official, creating a centralized trigger for eligibility.
Regulations and dispute procedures
The Administrator of General Services must prescribe regulations to implement the lump-sum authority. Regulations will cover (1) when agencies may authorize the lump sum, (2) how the lump-sum amount will be calculated, and (3) the process for employees to dispute relocation expenses, including the right to appeal an agency decision to the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals under applicable Board procedures.
Table of sections amended
The bill adds an entry to the table of sections for Subchapter II to insert the new §5739a: Authority for lump sum payment for relocation, ensuring the statute’s placement reflects its new placement within the relocation benefits framework.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Federal employees who relocate under government direction benefit from a simplified, single-payment option that could speed compensation.
- Agency heads and designees gain a clear authority pathway to authorize relocations and streamline approval processes.
- General Services Administration gains a defined regulatory mandate to standardize lump-sum payments, reducing ad hoc variation across agencies.
- Disbursing officials gain a centralized mechanism and clear guidelines for processing lump-sum payments.
- The Civilian Board of Contract Appeals gains a formal appeal channel for relocation expense disputes, offering due process for affected employees.
Who Bears the Cost
- Agency HR and payroll offices bear the administrative burden of implementing the new lump-sum framework and ensuring proper calculation of amounts.
- Disbursing offices take on duties related to issuing the lump sum and documenting compliance with regulations.
- Agencies may face budgeting and cost-tracking implications if lump sums differ from traditional relocation costs or if disputes are frequent.
- Employees who incur relocation costs not fully covered by the lump sum may experience gaps that would require agency adjustments or additional guidance in regulations.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing administrative efficiency and standardized lump-sum payments with the risk that a single payment may under- or over-compensate actual relocation costs, depending on how the calculation is set in regulations and how broadly “relocation in the interest of the Government” is interpreted.
The bill introduces a single-lump relocation payment framework, but significant implementation questions remain. The exact calculation of the lump sum will be determined by forthcoming regulations, raising near-term budgeting and cost-tracking considerations for agencies.
The model shifts risk from the government’s multi-payment approach to a single payment whose adequacy depends on the regulatory formula and the facts of individual relocations. The appeal pathway to the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals provides due process, but it may also introduce an additional layer of administrative review that agencies and employees must navigate.
Finally, the absence of explicit funding language or caps means that the cost implications for annual relocation budgets will hinge on the regulatory design and agency usage patterns.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.