Board of Contract Appeals

                 General Services Administration

                      Washington, D.C. 20405











                          _____________



                          April 1, 2004

                          _____________





                         GSBCA 16351-RELO





             In the Matter of JACQUELINE S. FERGUSON





     Jacqueline S. Ferguson, Columbia, SC, Claimant.



     Terry Burton, Chief, Travel Section, Financial Services Center, Department of

Veterans Affairs, Austin, TX, appearing for Department of Veterans Affairs.



DeGRAFF, Board Judge.



     In April 2003, Jacqueline S. Ferguson, a newly hired federal employee, moved from

California to Georgia to accept a position with the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). 

In Georgia, Ms. Ferguson contracted to purchase a house and planned to close the purchase

transaction on October 1, 2003.  Before the closing occurred, DVA told Ms. Ferguson she

was being transferred to South Carolina, and she canceled the purchase of the house.  When

Ms. Ferguson canceled the purchase, her mortgage company had incurred expenses of $308

on her behalf and Ms. Ferguson paid this amount to the mortgage company.  Ms. Ferguson

submitted a claim to DVA for the $308 as a reimbursable expense incurred in connection

with her transfer to South Carolina.  DVA decided not to reimburse Ms. Ferguson for the

claimed expense.  DVA did, however, reimburse her for the expenses of settling an

unexpired lease in Georgia and it paid her $500 for miscellaneous expenses.  Ms. Ferguson

asks us to review DVA's decision.



     When an agency transfers an employee from one permanent duty station to another,

various statutes and regulations authorize the agency to reimburse the employee for

relocation expenses.  The statutes and regulations provide an agency shall pay an employee

who transfers in the interest of the Government for expenses of the sale of the residence (or

the settlement of an unexpired lease) of the employee at the old official station and the

purchase of a residence at the new official station.  5 U.S.C.   5724a(d)(1) (2000); 41 CFR

pt. 302-11 (2003).  In addition, when an agency transfers an employee in the interest of the

Government, the employee is entitled to be paid an amount for miscellaneous expenses.  5

U.S.C.   5724a(f); 41 CFR pt. 302-16.  Unlike transferred employees, new employees are not

entitled to either real estate transaction expenses or an amount for miscellaneous expenses. 

41 CFR pt. 302-3, subpt. A.



     Applying these rules to Ms. Ferguson's claim shows DVA cannot reimburse her

claimed $308 expense either as a real estate purchase transaction expense or as a

miscellaneous expense incurred as the result of her move from California to Georgia, because

as a new employee she was not entitled to be paid either real estate transaction expenses or

an amount for miscellaneous expenses.  Also, DVA cannot reimburse her claimed expense

as a real estate sales transaction expense incurred as the result of her move from Georgia to

South Carolina, because she never owned and therefore never sold the house in Georgia.  



     DVA might be able to pay Ms. Ferguson's claim, however, as a miscellaneous expense

incurred in connection with her transfer from Georgia to South Carolina.  Miscellaneous

expenses are costs associated with, among other things, discontinuing a residence at an old

duty station.  41 CFR 302-16.1(a).  As DVA points out, Ms. Ferguson never occupied the

house in Georgia and never commuted regularly to work from the house.  However, in

situations similar to the one we have here, the Comptroller General concluded agencies could

reimburse employees when a transfer made in the interest of the Government prevented an

employee from completing a purchase transaction and occupying a house.  Travis Stevenson,

B-182929 (Nov. 26, 1975); Mark S. Siegler, B-180377 (Aug. 8, 1974).  We reached a similar

conclusion in Christopher A. Haubert, GSBCA 13980-RELO, 97-1 BCA   28,864.  Thus,

even though the house in Georgia was never Ms. Ferguson's residence, she can be reimbursed

for miscellaneous expenses connected with her cancellation of the contract to purchase the

house, because she canceled the contract due to her transfer to South Carolina in the interest

of the Government.



     DVA paid Ms. Ferguson $500 for the miscellaneous expenses she incurred as the

result of her transfer to South Carolina, and this is the maximum amount she can receive

unless DVA determines it is appropriate to pay a greater amount.  If DVA makes such a

determination, Ms. Ferguson will have to provide DVA with evidence of all the

miscellaneous expenses she incurred as the result of her transfer, including the $308 she paid

to the mortgage company.  If she can establish her expenses exceeded $500, DVA can

reimburse her expenses within the limits set out in the regulations.  41 CFR 302-16.103,

-16.104, -16.200.







                                   __________________________________

                                   MARTHA H. DeGRAFF

                                   Board Judge