Board of Contract Appeals

                 General Services Administration

                      Washington, D.C. 20405







                                                 



                        September 13, 2002

                                                 





                         GSBCA 15909-RELO





                  In the Matter of DON E. STOUT





     Don E. Stout, Bowie, MD, Claimant.



     Ray E. York, Deputy Director, Travel Systems & Procedures, Indianapolis Center,

Defense Finance and Accounting Service, Indianapolis, IN,  appearing for Department of

Defense.



DANIELS, Board Judge (Chairman).



     The Department of the Army transferred Don E. Stout from Redstone Arsenal,

Alabama, to Alexandria, Virginia, in April 2001.  Mr. Stout's travel orders authorized

reimbursement of sixty days of temporary quarters subsistence expenses (TQSE), but the

Army rejected his claim for such reimbursement.  According to the agency, "Inasmuch as Mr.

Stout had already secured permanent lodging before reporting for duty at his new assignment,

and he and his wife occupied and continue to maintain a joint household, we see no validity

to his claim for TQSE."  We agree with the agency that this is good cause for rejecting the

claim.



                            Background



     Mr. Stout's wife is also a civilian employee of the Department of the Army.  In

December 2000, the Army transferred Mrs. Stout from Alabama to Aberdeen, Maryland. 

After living in a hotel for more than two months, Mrs. Stout located an apartment to her

liking in Bowie, Maryland.  In February 2001, Mr. and Mrs. Stout signed a lease for this

apartment  [Foot # 1 ] and Mrs. Stout moved into it.



     

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

[Foot # 1 ]       Mr. Stout says that he "did not sign a lease on 17 Feb 2001. . . .  I signed a

copy of the proposed lease on the 10th of June 2001."  This statement is not true.  The record

contains a copy of the lease signed by both Mr. and Mrs. Stout and dated by both of them "17

Feb 01."

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



 The Stouts' daughter lived in the same apartment complex in which their new apartment was

located.  Just as Mr. Stout was relocating from Alabama, the daughter was leaving Maryland

to begin an educational program in Minnesota.  Her apartment lease had not yet expired,

however.  According to Mr. Stout, for the next two months, he and his wife slept in their

daughter's apartment and used their own unit for the storage of their household goods.  Mr.

Stout paid his daughter's rent for those two months.  In June, he says, the daughter's lease

expired and he and his wife moved to their own apartment.



                            Discussion



     The Federal Travel Regulation explains that "[t]he TQSE allowance is intended to

reimburse an employee reasonably and equitably for subsistence expenses incurred when it

is necessary to occupy temporary quarters."  41 CFR 302-5.3 (2000) (emphasis added). 

Similarly, the Department of Defense's Joint Travel Regulations provide that "TQSE . . . is

intended to reimburse employees for reasonable subsistence expenses incurred when they

and/or their dependents must occupy temporary quarters."  JTR C13105 (Apr. 1, 2001)

(emphasis added).



     Mr. Stout has not demonstrated that it was necessary for him to occupy temporary

quarters when he arrived at his new duty station.  He and his wife had already leased an

apartment in the area, and the fact that they lived there beginning in June 2001 shows that

the unit was sufficient for the two of them.  The decision to sleep in their daughter's

apartment in the same complex, and to use the couple's own unit for the storage of household

goods, was made voluntarily, rather than from necessity.  Reimbursement would therefore

be contrary to the purpose of the governing regulations.  Cf. Charles R. Stroble, GSBCA

15571-RELO, 01-2 BCA   31,564 (transferred employee who lived at new duty station in

apartment he was already obligated to lease not entitled to TQSE).



     Even if Mr. Stout had demonstrated that it was necessary for him to occupy his

daughter's apartment instead of his own during his first two months at his new duty station, 

we still would not find that the Army should have reimbursed him for the rent he paid for the

daughter's apartment.  When a transferred employee lives with a friend or relative upon

arriving at a new station, TQSE lodging payments are limited to the additional costs imposed

on the friend or relative due to the employee's lodging at the home.  Donald Mixon, GSBCA

14957-RELO, 00-1 BCA   30,606 (1999); John Wesley Summers, GSBCA 14600-RELO,

98-2 BCA   29,975.  There is no evidence that any costs were imposed on the Stouts'

daughter, in addition to rent she was already required to pay, because of her parents'

habitation in her apartment.



     We add a procedural note before closing.  This case was initiated by the Army, which

forwarded Mr. Stout's claim to us after denying it.  Rule 402(a)(2) (48 CFR 6104.2(a)(2)

(2001)).  In accordance with our Rules of Procedure, in docketing the case, we told Mr. Stout

of the filing and afforded him thirty days to reply to the agency's position.  Rule 404.  Mr.

Stout failed to submit a reply within the time allowed.  Our staff called him to ask whether

he intended to file comments, and he asked permission to make a filing within two weeks'

time.  We granted this request.  Although the amended deadline for his reply was more than

a month ago, he has not submitted comments or replied to our staff's many efforts to reach

him by telephone.  We consequently have decided the case solely on the basis of the

extensive record submitted by the agency.



                             Decision



     The claim is denied.











                              _________________________

                              STEPHEN M. DANIELS 

                              Board Judge