Board of Contract Appeals

                 General Services Administration

                      Washington, D.C. 20405









                      _____________________



                         October 18, 2004

                      _____________________





                         GSBCA 16454-RELO





               In the Matter of RICHARD E. STEGALL





     Richard E. Stegall, Herndon, VA, Claimant.



     Scott L. Mabry, Chief, Finance Division, Minerals Management Service, Department

of the Interior, Washington, DC, appearing for Department of the Interior.



HYATT, Board Judge.



     A new appointee who takes more than two years after the effective date of his

appointment to begin his move to the new duty station is no longer eligible to be paid the

expenses of transporting his household goods, notwithstanding the fact that his agency

initially gave him erroneous advice concerning his eligibility for reimbursement.



                            Background



     In 2001, claimant, Richard E. Stegall, accepted a position as a business specialist with 

the Procurement Operations Division of the Department of the Interior's Minerals

Management Service (MMS) in Herndon, Virginia.  Mr. Stegall reported for duty at MMS

on October 7, 2001.  This was Mr. Stegall's initial appointment as an employee of the United

States Government.  At the time he accepted the appointment, Mr. Stegall and his family

resided in Charlotte, North Carolina.

 

     The announcement for the position was silent with respect to the availability of

relocation expenses.  When he reported for work, Mr. Stegall was told that relocation costs

would not be allowed.  Mr. Stegall accomplished his travel to Herndon prior to reporting for

duty on October 7.  His wife and son remained in Charlotte so that his son could continue the

school year there.  Subsequently, his family spent the summer break in Herndon, but then

returned to Charlotte so his son could complete his senior year of high school.  Some time

after his son's graduation, Mr. Stegall's family moved to Herndon from Charlotte



     Approximately two years and four months after claimant reported to work, his

Division Chief told him that, due to an administrative oversight, the announcement under

which he was hired had omitted the inclusion of a statement that relocation costs were

authorized.  After receiving this information, and permanently relocating his family, Mr.

Stegall submitted a claim for reimbursement of the cost of transporting his household goods

to Virginia.  In light of the circumstances, Mr. Stegall's supervisor expressed a willingness

to authorize, and did attempt to authorize, a one-year extension of the two-year time limit on

commencing travel after a transfer.  By letter dated June 15, 2004, the Finance Division of

MMS denied his claim, explaining that since his household goods were shipped on May 6,

2004, more than two years after the effective date of his appointment, reimbursement of these

costs is barred by the two-year limitation contained in the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR). 



     Upon receiving this letter, Mr. Stegall asked the Board to review the agency's denial

of his claim.  He contends that the time frame governing his eligibility for reimbursement

should not have begun until he was informed that the costs were authorized.  He further

states that had he been told the expenses were authorized, he would have expedited his move

so as to complete it within the prescribed time.  



                            Discussion



     Statute prescribes that only certain, limited expenses may be authorized in connection

with the relocation of a new appointee.  5 U.S.C.   5723 (2000); see also Louis L. Lawes,

GSBCA 15577-RELO, 02-1 BCA   31,748.  This provision is implemented in the FTR,

which, as it was in effect on the date of claimant's appointment, provided that new appointees

could be reimbursed the cost of transportation and temporary storage to the first official

station.  41 CFR 302-1.10 (2001).  The FTR also provided, in pertinent part, that:



          All travel, including that for the immediate family, and

          transportation, including that for household goods allowed under

          this chapter, shall be accomplished as soon as possible.  The

          maximum time for beginning allowable travel and transportation

          shall not exceed 2 years from the effective date of the

          employee's transfer or appointment. . . .



Id. 302-1.6.  [Foot # 1 ]  



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

[Foot # 1 ]         There are several exceptions to the two-year limit, but none are

applicable to claimant's circumstances.

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





     The requirement to begin allowable travel and transportation within a defined period

of time after a transfer effects the intent of the authorizing statute, which is to ensure that the

employee is reimbursed for expenses that are incurred incident to the transfer.  See Lawrence

W. Weishoff, GSBCA 15536-RELO, 01-2 BCA   31,504; Paul W. Gard, Jr., GSBCA

15311-RELO, 00-2 BCA   31,053.  This regulation has the force and effect of law and cannot

be waived in an individual case.  Marion F. Clagg, B-193814 (June 18, 1979); 49 Comp.

Gen. 145 (1969).  This is the case notwithstanding the fact that the agency erroneously

advised claimant that the benefits would not be allowed and was willing to extend the FTR's

two-year time limit.  Weishoff.   In sum, Mr. Stegall was required to begin transportation of

his household goods no later than October 6, 2003.  Since he did not begin his move by that

date, he is not eligible for reimbursement of the costs of transporting his household goods

to Virginia.  









                                   _________________________________

                                   CATHERINE B. HYATT

                                   Board Judge