Board of Contract Appeals

                 General Services Administration

                      Washington, D.C. 20405





         _______________________________________________

                                 

                          March 25, 2002

         _______________________________________________

                                 



                         GSBCA 15717-RELO

                                 



                   In the Matter of ROY BURRELL             





     Roy Burrell, Dallas, TX, Claimant.



     J. Patrick O'Toole, Director, Division of Travel Management, Social Security

Administration, Baltimore, MD, appearing for Social Security Administration.

     

BORWICK, Board Judge.



     In this matter, Mr. Roy Burrell, claimant, an employee of the Social Security

Administration (SSA or agency) contests the SSA's refusal to reimburse claimant for an

additional period of eligibility for temporary quarters subsistence expense (TQSE)

entitlement beyond the thirty day maximum allowed for the fixed-amount method of TQSE. 

We dismiss this matter for lack of jurisdiction.



     After receiving his initial change of station travel order, which granted claimant thirty

days of TQSE, claimant elected the fixed-amount TQSE reimbursement method.  [Foot # 1

]  Later, after discovering that he could not close on the purchase of his new residence within

the initial thirty-day TQSE period, claimant requested an additional, but unspecified, period

of TQSE to allow him to proceed to closing.  The agency issued an amended authorization

extending the TQSE period for an additional thirty days.  Claimant states that in reliance

upon the amended travel authorization, he incurred $3500 of additional TQSE expenses. 

Upon submission of claimant's voucher for the additional expenses, SSA realized that

claimant had elected the fixed-amount method of TQSE reimbursement and refused payment. 

Claimant appealed to this Board challenging the agency's refusal to reimburse him for the

additional TQSE expenses incurred.



     

****************** Footnote Begin **********

[Foot # 1 ]        SSA paid claimant $3713 based on the fixed amount method.  

****************** Footnote End ************



We do not reach the merits of this matter, because it is evident that we lack jurisdiction to

settle the claim.  As indicated in the record before the Board, claimant is a member of the

American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE).  AFGE's collective bargaining

agreement (CBA) with SSA establishes a grievance procedure.  Article twenty-four, section

two of the CBA defines a "grievance" as any complaint "by an employee concerning any

matter relating to the employment of the employee."  The provision also includes any

complaint by any employee concerning "any claimed violation, misinterpretation or

misapplication of any law, rule or regulation affecting conditions of employment."  The

provision does not exclude relocation matters from the scope of the grievance procedure. 

Article twenty-four, section three of the CBA provides that employees may initiate

grievances and that the CBA "is the exclusive procedure available to bargaining unit

employees, the Union or the [Social Security] Administration for the resolution of

grievances."  



     As such, claimant is covered by a collective bargaining agreement which provides the

exclusive administrative means for resolving this matter.  As we explained in Byron D.

Cagle, GSBCA 15369-RELO, 01-1 BCA   31,333, at 154,761:



     Under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, where a collective bargaining

     agreement provides procedures for resolving grievances which are within the

     scope of the agreement, and the agreement does not explicitly and

     unambiguously exclude the disputed matter from these procedures, the

     procedures are the exclusive administrative means for resolving the dispute. 

     Claudia J. Fleming-Howlett, GSBCA 14236-RELO, 98-1 BCA   29,534; Larry

     D. Morrill, GSBCA 13925[-TRAV], 98-1 BCA   29,528.  This matter,

     therefore, must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, since the claimant must

     follow the disputes procedure mandated by the collective bargaining

     agreement. 



     Indeed, in this case, it appears that claimant has used the AFGE's grievance

procedures and did not obtain relief.  



     SSA maintains that the CBA does not address the resolution of disputes concerning 

travel policy and that this Board remains the "ultimate arbiter" in deciding whether or not

Federal agencies have correctly interpreted and applied travel regulations.   SSA is simply

wrong.  The travel regulations obviously concern conditions of employment - in this case,

the extent of TQSE entitlement upon an employee's transfer.  The grievance procedures cover

any employee complaint about any violation of any regulation affecting conditions of

employment.  Since the CBA establishes the exclusive procedure for resolving claimant's

grievance, claimant may not file a claim with the Board.  Carter v. Gibbs, 909 F.2d 1452,

1456 (Fed. Cir.), (en banc) cert. denied sub nom.  Carter v. Goldberg, 498 U.S. 811 (1990).



     This matter, therefore, is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.







                                        __________________________

                                        ANTHONY S. BORWICK

                                        Board Judge