November 27, 1996 GSBCA 13696-RELO In the Matter of WAYNE P. DELZER Wayne P. Delzer, Billings, MT, Claimant. Michael H. Trujillo, M.D., Director, Indian Health Service, Rockville, MD; and Duane J. Jeanotte, Director, Indian Health Service, Billings, MT, appearing for the Department of Health and Human Services. GOODMAN, Board Judge. Mr. Wayne P. Delzer, an employee of the Department of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service (IHS), has requested that the General Accounting Office review his claim for reimbursement of relocation costs. There is a disagreement between Mr. Delzer and the agency as to whether he requested an extension of the applicable time limit for completion of the real estate sale and purchase transactions. Mr. Delzer claims he submitted a written request for a one-year extension and was verbally granted an extension, while IHS asserts it has no record of the request for the extension, that no extension was ever granted, and no extension would have been granted based upon the circumstances. IHS has therefore denied his claim. We find that the denial was proper. On August 15, 1991, Mr. Delzer received notification that he was selected for the position of Mechanical Engineer in Billings, Montana, to be reassigned on September 22, 1991. Mr. Delzer was living on the Crow Indian Reservation in Hardin, Montana. Mr. Delzer has submitted a copy of a letter dated September 22, 1991, he addressed to the Area Mechanical Engineer (Billings Area Indian Health Service), which reads, in its entirety: Travel Extension Billings Area Travel Officer It is requested that an extension would be granted for additional time for the purpose of selling my house and moving my belongings from Hardin to Billings. Mr. Delzer asserts that "[t]he travel officer from the Billings Area Indian Health Service received a request for extension of travel reimbursement for myself, and she in turn wrote across my travel orders that the IHS . . . will move my household goods after my house sells." The travel orders dated September 30, 1991 contain the notation "will move HHGs [household goods] after his house sells." Mr. Delzer further asserts that the home was listed for sale, but was not sold until almost three years from the date of his transfer. By memorandum dated July 14, 1994, to the Area Mechanical Engineer (Billings Area Indian Health Service), Mr. Delzer stated: On August 15, 1991, I received approval for transportation expenses for household goods from Hardin, to Billings Montana. Because I was required to live in this outlying location, it has been very difficult to sell our home after being transferred . . . . We have been forced to live there until the sale because the house could not be rented or leased. On September 9, 1991, the time limit was extended until the sale of the house. At this time a workable offer has been made for the property which will close on August 10, 1994. . . . [E]xpenses are requested to move my household goods to Billings. By memorandum dated July 21, 1994, the Assistant Area Director advised Mr. Delzer that: Upon review of your change of station file, there is no record of your having submitted any type of request prior to July 14, 1994. Therefore I am unable to grant your request. If you submitted this request and can produce a copy please send it to me for review and further consideration of your request. In response, Mr. Delzer sent a memorandum dated August 22, 1994, which enclosed a copy of the September 22, 1991, letter and read as follows: During unpacking my household goods on August 22, 1994, employment records were uncovered that contained a copy of the memo that was requested in the June [sic] 21, 1994 memo . . . and submitted to the travel officer in original form on September 22, 1991. Again, it is requested that expenses be reimbursed for home sale and moving household goods to Billings . . . . In response, the Assistant Area Director sent a memo to Mr. Delzer dated August 25, 1994, which read: The request in question and any request regarding relocation expenses would have to have been submitted to my office for consideration as I am the approving official. Had a request been granted proper procedure would then have been followed, i.e. amended travel order showing approved extension. When we discussed this situation recently, I indicated to you that I would try and help you with this situation if you could find any documentation where we (IHS) approved/authorized the extension. Absent this type of documentation I am not able to assist you in this matter. On August 10, 1994, Mr. Delzer sold his house. He claims reimbursement for relocation costs. The record does not contain any information concerning the amount of costs claimed. By memorandum dated October 6, 1994, the Associate Director of the Office of Administration and Management denied Mr. Delzer's claim and stated: The documents forwarded to this office did not provide evidence that Mr. Delzer's request was made within the initial 2-year time frame. While there was a copy of a letter dated September 22, 1991, in the package, there is no evidence that this letter was received by the Billings Area Travel Officer. Had Mr. Delzer sent such a letter, your office should have denied his request. The basis for denial would have been that he had no intention of selling the property during the 2-year time frame. When an employee relocates, it is assumed he will make every attempt to sell a residence immediately . . . . Even though Mr. Delzer indicated that the market was slow in the area where his housing was located, it would have been impossible for someone to predict the amount of time for a property to remain on the real estate market prior to a sale. According to the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR), 41 CFR 302-6.1(e), expenses incurred in connection with residence transactions of relocated federal civilian employees may generally be reimbursed only where the settlement date of such a transaction is not later than two years after the date that the employee reported for duty at the new official station. The two-year limitation may be extended by the agency for an additional period of time not to exceed one year. Under the FTR, approval of a third year within which reimbursement of residence transaction expenses may be available "shall be based on a determination that extenuating circumstances, acceptable to the agency concerned, have prevented the employee from completing the sale and purchase or lease termination transactions in the initial time frame and that the residence transactions are reasonably related to the transfer of official station." 41 CFR 302-6(e)(2)(iii) (1995). Mr. Delzer is not entitled to reimbursement. Mr. Delzer asserts that he made a request for an extension which the agency denies that it received. There is no convincing evidence that the agency received the request. Mr. Delzer maintains that the statement on his travel orders that his household goods "will move after his house sells" is evidence of receipt of the request. This does not confirm receipt of the request, as such goods would have been shipped if the house had sold within the initial two-year period, regardless of whether the request was made. Additionally, the request that allegedly was made occurred at the very beginning of the initial two year period, and did not cite extenuating circumstances. No extenuating circumstances existed at that time, as such circumstances must be such that they "prevented the employee from completing the sale and purchase . . . transactions in the initial time frame [two years]." Thus, the request could not have been granted even if received. Robert L. Palmer, Jr., GSBCA 13670-RELO (Nov. 8, 1996). Finally, Mr. Delzer maintains that the request for extension was granted and would have allowed reimbursement whenever his house was sold. There is no authority which would have allowed such an open-ended request. The agency properly denied Mr. Delzer's claim. _____________________ ALLAN H. GOODMAN Board Judge