Board of Contract Appeals

                 General Services Administration

                      Washington, D.C. 20405







                         _______________



                           May 3, 2004

                         _______________





                         GSBCA 16335-RELO





               In the Matter of ANDREW K. MOGHRABI





     Andrew K. Moghrabi, San Francisco, CA, Claimant.



     Shirley L. Autry, Deputy Director, Finance Center, United States Army Corps of

Engineers, Millington, TN, appearing for Department of the Army.



GOODMAN, Board Judge.



     Claimant, Andrew K. Moghrabi, is a civilian employee of the United States Army

Corps of Engineers.  He requests that this Board review the agency's denial of reimbursement

of certain expenses incurred during his permanent change of station (PCS).



                       Factual Background



     Claimant received travel orders in July 2003, to relocate from Portland, Oregon, to

San Francisco, California.  He states that he had been notified the previous month of his

pending relocation and was planning to take a househunting trip (HHT) to his new duty

station.  However, when claimant received his travel orders, his new supervisor demanded

that he report for duty immediately.  Claimant's travel orders authorized reimbursement for

round-trip travel for a HHT and reimbursement for sixty days of temporary quarters

subsistence expenses calculated by the actual expense method (TQSE(AE)).  Claimant states:



     Based on this exigency and for the convenience of the government, I was

     denied a house-hunting trip and I traveled to San Francisco on the weekend

     26-27 July, checked in a hotel and reported promptly on Monday 28 July.  I

     had no choice but to stay in the hotel while looking for a place to live.  I

     incurred cost beyond the allowable limit of $85 per day as my hotel cost was

     $138.50 per day.



     Claimant submitted a travel voucher which requested reimbursement of his actual

lodging expenses and meal expenses.  The agency denied reimbursement of $2621.56, the

amount which exceeded the regulatory allowance for TQSE(AE).  Claimant seeks

reimbursement of the disallowed amount.



                           Discussion

                                

     Claimant was authorized a househunting trip and the maximum of 60 days TQSE but

was ordered to accomplish his new PCS without the opportunity to take the househunting

trip.  He lodged in a hotel for the sixty days authorized.  He was reimbursed by the agency

the maximum amount allowable by regulation, and was denied the remainder of his actual

expenses incurred.  Claimant asserts he had no choice but to stay in the hotel and incur the

expenses he incurred.



     The Joint Travel Regulations (JTR) applicable to claimant state that temporary

quarters subsistence expense (actual method)  is a discretionary allowance . . . that is intended

to reimburse employees for reasonable subsistence expenses incurred when they and/or their

dependents must occupy temporary quarters.  JTR C13200 (May 2003). The JTR states

further:



     TQSE(AE) is an actual expense allowance based on: . . . the $85 Standard

     CONUS per diem rate for temporary quarters occupied in all CONUS

     localities, or . . . the PDS locality (not the lodging location) per diem rate . . .

     for temporary quarters occupied in OCONUS localities.  



JTR C13205.  



     As the TQSE(AE) allowance is based on specific per diem rates, it will not

compensate the employee for all actual expenses incurred if the employee's expenses exceed

the amount allowed.



     With regard to the HHT, the authority to provide an employee and/or spouse a trip at

Government expense to a new PDS to find a permanent residence prior to transfer is a

management tool.  Its purpose is to lower the Government's overall PCS costs by reducing

the time an employee would otherwise occupy temporary quarters.  JTR C4107.  Claimant's

inability  to accomplish an HHT did not create entitlement to reimbursement for TQSE

expenses in excess of the regulatory limit.  In fact, had claimant accomplished an HHT, his

entitlement to TQSE would have been reduced by the number of days he was reimbursed for

the HHT.  JTR C13225-A.1 (May 2003)



                             Decision



     The claim is denied.









                                   __________________________________

                                   ALLAN H. GOODMAN

                                   Board Judge