Board of Contract Appeals

                    General Services Administration

                         Washington, D.C. 20405

 

                            ________________

 

                           November 28, 2000

                            ________________

 

 

                            GSBCA 15395-TRAV

 

 

                      In the Matter of DAROLD WARD

 

 

        Dennis  E.  Lind  of Datsopoulos,  MacDonald  &  Lind, P.C.,

   Missoula, MT, appearing for Darold Ward, Missoula, MT, Claimant.

 

        Pete  Rockx, Chief, Employee and Labor Relations, Department

   of  Agriculture,  Rosslyn,   VA,  appearing  for  Department   of

   Agriculture.

 

   GOODMAN, Board Judge. 

 

        Claimant, Dr. Darold Ward, is an employee of the  Department

   of Agriculture.   In 1997, the agency determined that it had paid

   claimant $276.44  more than it  should have in  reimbursement for

   expenses he contended he had incurred while traveling on official

   business.  Claimant requested the agency to forward to this Board

   his request for  review of the determination, but  the agency did

   not do so.

 

        In  1998,  claimant  initiated an  administrative  grievance

   regarding several administrative matters,  including the agency's

   failure to  forward to the  Board the  request for review  of the

   travel  expense  determination.   Two  years  later,  a grievance

   examiner issued  a recommended  decision on  the matters  raised.

   One of the  recommendations was that the agency  forward the 1997

   request to this Board.

 

        Shortly after the  examiner's report  was issued,  claimant,

   through counsel, filed with us what was styled as  an "appeal" of

   the  recommended decision.    The  Board  does not  have  general

   authority to  review grievance examiners' determinations,  and we

   have no charge  to consider  any of the  issues mentioned in  the

   recommended  decision other than  the claim for  travel expenses.

   Our jurisdiction,  relevant to the  "appeal," is  only to  settle

   claims  involving  expenses  incurred  by federal  employees  for

   official  travel and  transportation.   31  U.S.C.     3702(a)(3)

   (Supp. IV 1998).   Accordingly, we consider  claimant's filing to

   be a request  that we review the agency's  determination that the

   agency overpaid the employee $276.44 for expenses he claimed.

 

        By  memorandum   dated  September  22,  2000,  the  agency's

   Director of Financial Resources authorized its  Operations Branch

   to refund to the claimant the  amount claimant seeks.  This Board

   inquired   from  claimant  as  to  whether  he  wished  the  case

   dismissed, in view  of the agency's  refund.  Claimant's  counsel

   responded by sending the Board a copy of his letter dated October

   19, 2000, to the agency, stating that claimant could not agree to

   dismiss the appeal, and stating further:

 

        [The agency's] original  accusations were inappropriate

        and  inaccurate. .  .  .  [Claimant]  was  entitled  to

        substantially  greater  reimbursement   than  was  ever

        claimed.   The [agency] audit conducted is plagued with

        inaccuracies, inconsistencies and mistakes.  [Claimant]

        was  required to  expend  an  enormous  amount  of  his

        personal time and funds to  respond to and rebut  these

        false accusations. . . .

 

        Accordingly,  it is  [claimant's]  position  that at  a

        minimum   he   is   entitled   to   compensatory   time

        reimbursement  and  to  costs  and  fees  in  defending

        himself  for  an  unwarranted  and  unjustified  agency

        action.  [His]  attorney's fees alone are now in excess

        of $8,000.  

 

        As explained above, the Board has no authority to  generally

   review prior agency  action or consider claims  for reimbursement

   for personal time expended in defending agency action, attorney's

   fees, and costs that were never  claimed.  The agency has  agreed

   to pay  claimant the amount  of the remaining travel  expenses at

   issue.  There  is  no other  issue before this Board  for review.

   Accordingly, we dismiss this case.

 

 

 

                                      ________________________

                                      ALLAN H. GOODMAN

                                      Board Judge