________________________________________ December 2, 1997 ________________________________________ GSBCA 14267-RELO In the Matter of KEVIN A. MADSEN Kevin A. Madsen, Ephrata, WA, Claimant. Brenda Barker, Manager, Finance and Accounting Services, Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the Interior, Denver, CO, appearing for the Department of the Interior. BORWICK, Board Judge. The Department of the Interior (agency), on behalf of employee Kevin A. Madsen, requests a decision pursuant to 31 U.S.C.A. 3529 (West Supp. 1997) on whether the employee is eligible for reimbursement of certain foreclosure and appraisal expenses, in connection with the foreclosure of his residence at his old station, upon his permanent transfer of station. We conclude that the employee is be not entitled to reimbursement if the costs are those incident to the judicial process of foreclo- sure. Mr. Madsen, an employee of the Bureau of Reclamation, transferred from Riverside, California to Ephrata, Washington. The agency authorized relocation expenses in connection with the transfer. Mr. Madsen informed the agency that he might lose his house at his old duty station in foreclosure if it did not sell, and inquired what, if any, foreclosure costs might be reimburs- able. The agency advised Mr. Madsen that it would not reimburse him for any incurred foreclosure costs. Mr. Madsen responded: I request that you review the policy that lumps all costs of a house going through foreclosure as litiga- tion and therefore not reimbursable. The current interpretation seems to be that no costs are covered once a house goes through foreclosure. On page 24 of my relocation book it lists several things that are covered for a sale. It should also apply when the bank takes it back. For example, advertising expenses, title insurance, legal paper work, and loan fees. Mr. Madsen also claims entitlement to the cost of an appraisal to determine the value of the house and the amount of the statutory cap, if he had sold his house. Statute provides: An agency shall pay to or on behalf of an employee who transfers in the interest of the Government expenses of the sale of the residence . . . of the employee at the old official station . . . that are required to be paid by the employee when the old and new official stations are located within the United States. 5 U.S.C.A. 5724a(d)(1)(West Supp. 1997). The Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) provides that the "costs of litigation are not reimbursable." 41 CFR 302-6.2(c) (1994). The General Accounting Office (GAO) has held that expenses assessed incident to the judicial process of foreclosure are litigation costs and therefore non-reimbursable, but that the fact that title to the employee's residence is transferred by sheriff's sale as the consequence of foreclosure does not itself preclude reimbursement under applicable sections of the FTR. 61 Comp. Gen. 112 (1981). We agree with this position and follow it. To the extent that the employee's anticipated advertising expenses, title insurance, legal paper work, and loan fees are assessed incident pursuant to the judicial process of foreclo- sure, they are not reimbursable. The cost of an appraisal cost would generally be reimburs- able in connection with a completed sale of a residence, and if otherwise allowable under the FTR. 41 CFR 302-6.2(b); cf. Paul E. Marshall, GSBCA 13811-RELO, 97-2 BCA 29,036. _________________________ ANTHONY S. BORWICK Board Judge