Board of Contract Appeals General Services Administration Washington, D.C. 20405 ________________________ April 14, 1999 ________________________ GSBCA 14897-RELO In the Matter of JANET M. NICHOLSON Janet M. Nicholson, North Las Vegas, NV, Claimant. Dana D. Sherman, Comptroller, Air Force Reserve Command, Department of the Air Force, Coraopolis, PA, appearing for Department of the Air Force. DeGRAFF, Board Judge. In 1997, the Department of the Air Force transferred Janet M. Nicholson from Pennsylvania to Nevada. In connection with the transfer, the Air Force authorized reimbursement of real estate expenses associated with the sale of her residence. Ms. Nicholson sold a house in Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, and asked the Air Force to reimburse her for the expenses of that sale. The Air Force denied Ms. Nicholson's request because it concluded that the house was not Ms. Nicholson's actual residence at the time she was informed of the transfer. We deny the claim. Background Ms. Nicholson lived in a house that she owned in Aliquippa, Pennsylvania until 1993 or 1994, when she moved to a house that she owned in Connellsville, Pennsylvania. Ms. Nicholson's daughter lived in the Aliquippa house until April 1997, when she moved to South Carolina. Until her daughter moved, Ms. Nicholson stopped by the Aliquippa house each day after work. Sometimes she would continue on to Connellsville, and sometimes she would spend the night in Aliquippa with her daughter. After her daughter moved to South Carolina, Ms. Nicholson went by the Aliquippa house after work each day and then either drove to Connellsville or stayed in Aliquippa. She estimates that after April 1997, she spent two or three nights each week plus most weekends (Friday night through Monday morning) in Connellsville. Ms. Nicholson's civilian and military personnel and payroll records (Ms. Nicholson was a member of the Air Force reserve) showed that her address was the Connellsville house, and she used that address as her residence in order to compute her reimbursable expenses of official travel. On August 19, 1997, Ms. Nicholson's daughter returned to Aliquippa for surgery and Ms. Nicholson went to stay in the Aliquippa house to care for her daughter and granddaughter while her daughter recovered. Beginning on August 19, Ms. Nicholson commuted between her duty station and the Aliquippa house. Ms. Nicholson's daughter returned to South Carolina on September 10, 1997, and Ms. Nicholson remained in the Aliquippa house due to problems she was having with a family member in Connellsville. On September 16, 1997, the Air Force offered Ms. Nicholson the position in Nevada, and she accepted the offer. On that date, Ms. Nicholson was still in the Aliquippa house. The Air Force denied Ms. Nicholson's claim for reimbursement of the expenses she incurred when she sold the house in Aliquippa, because it was not convinced that her residence was Aliquippa on September 16, 1997, when she was offered the position in Nevada. Ms. Nicholson maintains that the Aliquippa house became her actual residence on August 19, 1997, "due to [her] daughter's medical problems." She also notes that her travel orders from Pennsylvania to Nevada show her address as Aliquippa. The Air Force says that the travel orders show her address as Aliquippa because Ms. Nicholson asked to have that address placed on her travel orders, and not because the Air Force recognized the Aliquippa address as her residence. The Air Force points out that Ms. Nicholson never changed either her civilian payroll and personnel records or her military payroll and personnel records to show that her address had changed from Connellsville to Aliquippa. Ms. Nicholson asks that we review the Air Force's decision to deny her claim. Discussion In order for the Air Force to reimburse Ms. Nicholson for the expenses associated with selling the Aliquippa house, she must establish that the house was her residence on September 16, 1997, when she received notice of her transfer. The relevant statute, 5 U.S.C. 5724a(d) (West Supp. 1998), provides that when an employee transfers in the interest of the Government, the agency shall pay "expenses of the sale of the residence . . . of the employee at the old official station . . . ." The regulations that implement this statute explain that the "dwelling" at the old duty station must be occupied by the employee and be the employee's "actual residence" when the agency informs the employee of the transfer, and must also be the quarters from which the employee regularly commutes to and from work. 41 CFR 302-1.4(k), 302-6.1(b), (d) (1998); JTR C14000-A.2, -A.4 (Sept. 1, 1995). An actual residence generally means physical presence in a place where a person makes a home, and a short visit or a temporary stay somewhere does not make that place a person's actual residence, even though the person is physically present there. Brown v. United States, 5 Cl. Ct. 1, aff'd, 741 F.2d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 1984); Leon H. Liegel, B-212697 (Dec. 23, 1983); Associate Director, AFMD, B-203136 (Feb. 23, 1982); M.W. Minnis, B-174937 (Jan. 3, 1973). Although Ms. Nicholson began commuting between her duty station and the Aliquippa house on August 19, 1997, she has not established that the house became the dwelling that she occupied as her actual residence on that date or that it was her residence on September 16, 1997. Ms. Nicholson's presence in the Aliquippa house on and after August 19 was not different in any material way from her presence in the house before that date. Before August 19, Ms. Nicholson was frequently present in the Aliquippa house, but she was only there for short visits or temporary stays and the house was not her actual residence. From August 19 through September 10, Ms. Nicholson stayed at the Aliquippa house because her daughter and granddaughter temporarily needed her assistance. Six days later, when the Air Force offered her the position in Nevada, she was still in the Aliquippa house due to problems with a family member in Connellsville. These facts do not convince us that Ms. Nicholson's presence in the Aliquippa house after August 19, or on September 16, was anything other than a short visit or a temporary stay. We deny the claim. __________________________________ MARTHA H. DeGRAFF Board Judge