Board of Contract Appeals

                 General Services Administration

                      Washington, D.C. 20405



                      _____________________



                         December 4, 2002

                      _____________________





                         GSBCA 15805-RELO





                In the Matter of GUILLERMO CHAVEZ





     Guillermo Chavez, Mexico City, Mexico, Claimant.



     N. Kurt Snyder, Chief, Travel Management Section, Office of Financial Management,

Immigration and Naturalization Service, Washington, DC, appearing for Department of

Justice.



NEILL, Board Judge.



     In late January 2001, claimant, Mr. Guillermo Chavez, an employee of the

Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), received orders transferring him from the

agency's offices in Los Angeles, California, to Mexico City.  Mr. Chavez claims to have

encountered numerous problems in being reimbursed for his temporary quarters subsistence

expenses. He has asked the Board to review the agency's processing of his claims for these

expenses.  Both Mr. Chavez and his agency have provided the Board with detailed

submissions regarding this case.  



     In reviewing these materials, the Board had occasion to question whether the

claimant's dispute is reserved for resolution pursuant to grievance procedures provided for

in a collective bargaining agreement covering agency employees.  Upon inquiry, the agency

has advised the Board that Mr. Chavez is, in fact, covered under a collective bargaining

agreement it entered with the National Immigration and Naturalization Service Council of

the American Federation of Government Employees. 



     The Board has recognized that, if a claim concerning travel or relocation expenses is

subject to resolution under the terms of a grievance procedure mandated within a collective

bargaining agreement, we lack the authority to settle the claim using our administrative

procedures unless the agreement explicitly and clearly excludes the claim from its

procedures.  Bernadette Hastak, GSBCA 13938-TRAV, et al., 97-2 BCA   29,092; accord,

e.g., Michael F. Morley, GSBCA 15457-RELO, 02-1 BCA   34,588 (2001); James P.

Mullins, GSBCA 15263-TRAV, 01-1 BCA   31,401; Gail Favela, GSBCA 14727-TRAV,

99-2 BCA   30,432; Harold S. Rubinstein, GSBCA 14667-RELO, 99-1 BCA    30,113;

Bernard F. Anderson, GSBCA 14438-TRAV, 98-2 BCA   29,924; Larry D. Morrill, GSBCA

13925-TRAV, 98-1 BCA   29,528; see also Dunklebarger v. Merit Systems Protection

Board, 130 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 1997).  Recently we have further concluded that this is true

even if the employee in question is not actually a member of the union.  It is enough that the

employee be an employee within the bargaining unit.  James C. Henzie, 15820-TRAV, 02-2

BCA   31,900.



     The agency has provided us with a copy of its collective bargaining agreement.  The

agreement states that the procedure negotiated for processing and resolving grievances is the

exclusive procedure available to the union and employees in the unit.  No exception is made

for an employee's claim regarding travel or relocation expenses. 



     Accordingly, we conclude that the Board is without the authority to resolve this

claim.  The claim is, therefore, dismissed.    



                                        _____________________     

                                        EDWIN B. NEILL

                                        Board Judge