____________________

                               July 11, 1997
                           ____________________


                             GSBCA 13962-RELO


                    In the Matter of LARRY W. WILLIAMS


     Larry W. Williams, Bettendorf, IA, Claimant.

     Al LaBombard, Chief, Employee Accounts Division, Austin
Finance Center, Department of Veterans Affairs, Austin, TX,
appearing for Department of Veterans Affairs.

DeGRAFF, Board Judge.

     Larry W. Williams was an employee of the Department of
Veterans Affairs (DVA) in Virginia when, in 1996, he accepted a
transfer to Illinois.  Mr. Williams purchased a residence at his
new duty station and asked DVA to reimburse him for the expenses he
incurred in connection with the purchase.  

     DVA reimbursed Mr. Williams for most of his expenses,
including $175 for legal fees he paid to the law firm that
conducted the title examination.  DVA decided not to reimburse
Mr. Williams $250 for legal fees he incurred when he hired an
attorney to advise him about purchasing his new residence.  DVA's
decision was based upon the written opinion of a DVA loan guaranty
officer that the work performed by the attorney hired by
Mr. Williams duplicated the work performed by the law firm that
performed the title examination, and that the fees Mr. Williams
paid to the attorney he hired were neither customarily paid by the
purchaser nor reasonable in the area. 

     Mr. Williams asks us to review DVA's decision.  Mr. Williams
disagrees with the DVA loan guaranty officer's conclusion that the
efforts of the attorney he hired duplicated the efforts of the law
firm that conducted the title examination.  Mr. Williams says that
he hired his own attorney because the law firm represented the
mortgage company and the seller, and Mr. Williams felt that he did
not have unbiased representation.  

                                Discussion

     When an employee is transferred from one permanent duty
station to another, the employing agency is authorized to reimburse
the employee for expenses required to be paid for the purchase of
a residence at the new duty station, so long as the expenses do not
exceed those customarily charged in the locality where the
residence is located.  5 U.S.C.  5724a(a)(4) (1994).  The Federal
Travel Regulation (FTR) implementing this statutory provision
provides that an agency may reimburse an employee for legal
expenses to the extent that the expenses are not included in some
other service for which the employee is seeking reimbursement.  In
addition, the FTR states that legal expenses of an employee who is
purchasing a residence are reimbursable only if the expenses are
customarily paid by a purchaser at the new duty station and do not
exceed the amount customarily charged in the locality of the new
residence.  41 CFR 302-6.2(c) (1996).  DVA's relocation procedures
require that when an employee submits a request for reimbursement,
the request will be reviewed by the DVA loan guaranty officer who
is responsible for the area where the residence was purchased.  The
loan guaranty officer is required to certify whether the expenses
claimed are reasonable and customarily paid in the locality.  MP-1,
pt. II, ch. 2, 13k(3)(B)3.  

     In his submissions to us, Mr. Williams takes issue with DVA's
conclusion that the services provided by the attorney he hired
duplicated the services provided by the law firm that conducted the
title examination.  He does not controvert DVA's conclusion that
the expenses he incurred when he hired an attorney were not
customary and reasonable in the area.  

     In order to settle Mr. Williams' claim, we do not have to
determine whether the services of the attorney he hired duplicated
the services of the law firm.  The facts establish that the
services provided by the attorney hired by Mr. Williams were not
customarily paid in the area and, according to the FTR, employees
will only be reimbursed for expenses which are customary.  A
relocating employee who purchases a residence may decide, for
whatever reason, to hire an attorney to provide advice concerning
the purchase.  But, if it is not customary in the area for a
purchaser to pay an attorney for such services, the employee may 
not be reimbursed for the fees paid to the attorney.  Lawrence D.
Obrist, B-234058 (Aug. 8, 1989).  DVA properly disallowed
Mr. Williams' request to be reimbursed for legal fees that he paid
to the attorney he hired, because that expense was not customarily
paid by a purchaser in the area.



                                   ________________________________
                                   MARTHA H. DeGRAFF
                                   Board Judge