Board of Contract Appeals

                 General Services Administration

                      Washington, D.C. 20405





                      _____________________



                          March 18, 2005          

                      _____________________       





                         GSBCA 16593-RELO





                    In the Matter of PAUL GILL





     Paul Gill, FPO Area Pacific, Claimant.



     Rebecca Lott, Comptroller, United States Naval Air Pacific Repair Activity, FPO

Area Pacific, appearing for Department of the Navy.



BORWICK, Board Judge.



     In this matter claimant, Paul Gill, contests the Department of the Navy's (agency's)

refusal to reimburse claimant for $3147.20 of  charges he incurred for non-temporary storage

of his household goods (HHG) and $432 for insurance charged by the commercial storage

facility.  Claimant incurred the charges in connection with his permanent change of station

(PCS) from a domestic duty station to a duty station outside the continental United States

(OCONUS).  We conclude that the agency violated the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) and

the Joint Travel Regulations (JTR) in effect when claimant reported for duty by refusing to

provide non-temporary storage of his HHG, either in Government-owned facilities or

commercially.  Under those circumstances, we grant the claim in substantial part and allow

reimbursement of the $3147.20, since the agency acknowledges that the amount does not

exceed what it would have cost the Government to procure non-temporary commercial

storage during the allowable storage period.  We deny the insurance portion of the claim,

since neither the FTR nor JTR allowed reimbursement of insurance charges for non-

temporary storage of HHG.  



                           Background 



     On October 10, 2001, the agency sent claimant on his first PCS from the Naval Depot,

Jacksonville, Florida, to the Naval Air Pacific Repair Facility, Okinawa, for a two-year tour

of duty.  Claimant could not transport his HHG to his overseas location.  The agency,

therefore, among other benefits, authorized claimant non-temporary storage of HHG during

his time abroad.  



     Claimant was advised that he could contract for non-temporary storage himself and

seek reimbursement later.  Claimant says that he obtained self-storage of his HHG, at rates

lower than the best commercial contract carrier rates available to the Government at the time

claimant entered into the contract.  Claimant served for three years in his overseas

assignment and then received a two-year extension of his tour.  



     Claimant moved his HHG into a self-storage facility in Chesapeake, Virginia, where

they remained from October 25, 2001, through January 1, 2004, at a total cost of $3147.20. 

After the agency refused claimant's request for reimbursement of his self-storage costs, the

agency moved claimant's HHG into non-temporary storage contracted for by the agency.   



     The agency's command states that funds are available for reimbursement and agrees

with claimant that the cost of claimant's self-storage was less than it would have been had

storage been contracted for by the Government.  Nevertheless, the agency's finance office

believes that there is no authority to reimburse claimant, because under the JTR, when non-

temporary storage is authorized, the storage must be either in Government-owned facilities

or contracted for by the Government, not the employee.  



                            Discussion



     The agency correctly observes that, when authorized, non-temporary storage may only

be provided in Government-owned storage facilities or in commercial storage that is obtained

by the Government.  The FTR in effect at the time claimant reported for duty provided that

an employee may be allowed non-temporary storage of HHG upon his or her OCONUS

relocation when the employee was unable to use, or not authorized to move, the HHG, if the

storage was authorized in the public interest, and if the estimated cost of the storage would

have been less than the cost of the round-trip transportation of the HHG.  41 CFR 302-9.2

(2001).  Since the agency had authorized claimant's non-temporary storage of HHG, the

agency had made those determinations and they are not at issue.  



     The FTR provided that the HHG may be stored either in available Government-owned

space or in suitable commercial or privately owned space if Government-owned  space was

not available or if commercial or privately owned space obtained by the Government was

more economical or suitable because of location, difference of transportation costs, or other

reasons.  41 CFR 302-9.2.  The language of the FTR suggested that it was the Government

that arranged, stored, and paid for the non-temporary storage of an employee's HHG, either

in Government facilities or suitable commercial or privately owned space.  



     The implementing JTR, in effect at the time of claimant's transfer, was to the same

effect.  Under the JTR, the transportation office storing the HHG forwarded the completed

HHG services order along with any amendments. to the employee and the employee's

OCONUS personnel office.  The gaining OCONUS personnel office established an employee

non-temporary storage HHG file that was separate from an employee's personnel records and

that served as a suspense file for any funding and any subsequent HHG shipment.  JTR

C8815-1, -2.  Allowable costs included those necessary for packing, crating, unpacking,

uncrating, transportation to and from the place of storage, charges while in storage,  and other

necessary charges directly related to the storage.  41 CFR 302-9.2(c)(2).

 [Foot # 1 ] 



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

[Foot # 1 ]        The current versions of the FTR and JTR are substantively the same.  See 41

CFR  302-8.103, -8.104, -8.200 (2003); JTR C5195 (2004).  

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



     The agency's finance office, relying on Masood Badizadegan, GSBCA 14393-RELO,

98-2 BCA   29,789, believes that because claimant chose to use self-storage, albeit relying

on erroneous advice, the charges are not reimbursable.  This case, however, involves more

than an agency official giving erroneous advice that leads an employee to an unfortunate--

and non-reimbursable--choice as regards relocation benefits.  This case primarily involves

the agency's failure to act.  



     Having authorized claimant's non-temporary storage of HHG, the agency was required

by the FTR and JTR to provide the storage, either in available Government-owned facilities

or in storage procured directly by the agency.  The agency's transportation office deprived

claimant of this benefit to which he was entitled.  In these limited circumstances, we have

allowed reimbursement of claimant's out of pocket expenses, as long as those expenses do

not exceed what it would have cost the Government to procure non-temporary storage

commercially during the allowable storage period.  See Kenneth W. Trotman, GSBCA

15250-RELO, 00-2 BCA   30,959; Alex L. Rowe, GSBCA 14479-RELO, 98-2 BCA   29,919. 

Similarly, when an agency has denied an employee the benefit of moving HHG by

Government Bill of Lading (GBL) because the agency was unable to procure a mover within

the time constraints of the move, we have allowed reimbursement of the employee's actual

expenses.  See Michael Vissichelli, GSBCA 15974-RELO, 03-2 BCA   32,311.  



     As for the insurance charge of $432, we do not regard that cost as reimbursable

because there was no showing, much less an agency determination, that the charge was

directly related to the storage of HHG, as was authorized by the FTR.  On its face, the

insurance charge seems to be a cost for the protection of the HHG.  The Board, therefore,

grants the claim in part.  





__________________________

ANTHONY S. BORWICK

Board Judge