___________________

                                May 1, 1997
                            ___________________


                             GSBCA 13868-RELO


                 In the Matter of CHESTER R. JOURDAN, JR.


     Chester R. Jourdan, Jr., Washington, DC, Claimant.

     Herman L. Simms, Associate Administrator for Administration,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC,
appearing for Department of Transportation.

PARKER, Board Judge.

     In September 1995, Chester R. Jourdan, Jr., an employee of the
Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), was transferred from Atlanta, Georgia to
Washington, D.C.  Among other things, Mr. Jourdan's travel
authorization stated that he was entitled to incur up to $2,000 in
costs for relocation services.

     When he arrived in Washington, Mr. Jourdan rented temporary
quarters for himself; his wife and daughter remained in Atlanta
pending the sale of their home.  Shortly after his arrival, NHTSA
officials informed Mr. Jourdan that his orders were incorrect, that
NHTSA does not participate in the relocation services program, and
that he would not be able to use a relocation service at Government
expense.

     Because he was unable to use a relocation service, Mr. Jourdan
requested that NHTSA extend the initial 60-day period for receiving
temporary quarters subsistence expenses (TQSE) for an additional 60
days to help defray the cost of maintaining two residences.  NHTSA
denied the request because Mr. Jourdan had not demonstrated "strong
mitigating circumstances which would have warranted an extension
and there simply was no funding available to pay for such an
extension."  Mr. Jourdan sold his home in Atlanta on August 30,
1996 without using a relocation service.

                                Discussion

     Mr. Jourdan has asked the Board to review NHTSA's denial of
his request to extend the TQSE period for an additional 60 days. 
As explained below, we find that NHTSA did not abuse its discretion
in denying the extension to Mr. Jourdan.

     Pursuant to statute, the Government pays certain expenses
incurred by its employees who are "transferred in the interest of
the government from one official station or agency to another for
permanent duty."  These expenses include "[s]ubsistence expenses of
the employee and his immediate family for a period of 60 days while
occupying temporary quarters when the new official station is
located within the United States [or other specified locations]." 
"The period of residence in temporary quarters may be extended for
an additional 60 days if the head of the agency concerned or his
designee determines that there are compelling reasons for the
continued occupancy of temporary quarters." 5 U.S.C.
 5724a(a)(3)(1994); see Thomas M. Hood, GSBCA 13845-RELO (Apr. 18,
1997).

     Section 302-5.2(a)(2) of the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR)
explains in more detail the circumstances under which the head of
an agency may determine that compelling reasons exist for extending
the period for TQSE:

          Extensions of the temporary quarters period
          may be authorized only in situations where
          there is a demonstrated need for additional
          time due to circumstances which have occurred
          during the initial 60-day period of occupancy
          and which are determined to be beyond the
          employee's control and acceptable to the
          agency.  Examples of compelling reasons which
          could be considered as beyond the employee's
          control may include, but are not limited to,
          the following situations:

               (i) Shipment and/or delivery of household
          goods to new residence is delayed due to
          extended transit time incident to ocean
          transportation, strikes, customs clearance,
          hazardous weather, fires, floods or other acts
          of God, or similar events.

               (ii) New permanent residence cannot be
          occupied because of unanticipated problems
          (delays in settlement on new residence, short
          term delay in construction of a new residence,
          etc.).

               (iii) Inability to locate permanent
          residence which is adequate for family needs
          because of housing conditions at the new
          official station.

               (iv) Sudden illness, or death of employee
          or immediate family member.

41 CFR 302-5.2(a) (1995).

     Mr. Jourdan's situation -- being incorrectly led to believe
that he would be able to use a relocation service -- does not fit
neatly within any of the FTR examples of compelling reasons for
extending the 60-day period for TQSE.  The examples, although not
all-inclusive, tend to describe situations in which an employee is
unable due to unforseen circumstances to find, move into, or
furnish a residence at the new duty station.  Here, there is no
evidence that Mr. Jourdan's inability to use a relocation service
affected his ability to find or move into a new residence in
Washington.  Moreover, although he did not sell his home in Atlanta
until August 1996, there is no evidence to indicate that Mr.
Jourdan would have sold his home sooner, or for as much money,
using a relocation service.  Under the circumstances, we are unable
to say that NHTSA abused its discretion in deciding that Mr.
Jourdan's circumstances were not "compelling" enough to grant him
a 60-day extension of the TQSE period.

                                 Decision

     The claim is denied.




                                   ___________________
                                   ROBERT W. PARKER
                                   Board Judge