Board of Contract Appeals
                    General Services Administration
                         Washington, D.C. 20405
 
 
 
                         _____________________
 
                            August 25, 1998
                         _____________________
 
 
                            GSBCA 14586-RELO
 
 
                    In the Matter of REBECCA MANNING
 
 
        Rebecca Manning, Provo, UT, Claimant.
 
        Brenda Barker, Manager, Accounts Receivable and Travel Team,
   Bureau  of Reclamation, Department  of the Interior,  Denver, CO,
   appearing for Department of the Interior.  
 
   BORWICK, Board Judge.
 
        Rebecca Manning (claimant), an employee of the Department of
   the  Interior's  Bureau of  Reclamation (agency),  challenges the
   disallowance of her  claim of $2084.06  in real estate  expenses.
   The  disallowance  was  for the  mortgage  insurance  required by
   claimant's Federal Housing Administration  (FHA) rural home loan.
   The  Federal  Travel  Regulation  (FTR)  explicitly  states  that
   mortgage insurance  is a non-reimbursable  expense.  41  CFR 302-
   6.2(d)(2)(I) (1997).  Therefore, the Board denies this claim.
 
        In  February 1998,  incident  to  her  permanent  change  of
   station  (PCS) from Ephrata, Washington, to Provo, Utah, claimant
   and  her  husband  purchased  a  home  in  Spanish  Forks,  Utah.
   Claimant purchased this home with an FHA loan through Countrywide
   Home Loans of Orem, Utah.  Among the many expenses indicated upon
   claimant's  settlement sheet  is a  payment  to Countrywide  Home
   Loans of $2084.06 for mortgage insurance.
 
        Claimant contends  that she  did not wish  to obtain  an FHA
   loan,  and  that  she  was   required  to  pay  the  $2084.06  to
   Countryside  Home Loans  as part  of the  loan application.   She
   maintains that because  she was forced to make  this payment, she
   should be reimbursed for the expense.  Although claimant does not
   expressly  acknowledge  that   the  expense   was  for   mortgage
   insurance, a written notation  of "mortgage insur[ance]"  appears
   next  to the  listing of  the  expense on  the settlement  sheet.
   Claimant signed this form, acknowledging  that it was "a true and
   accurate  statement of  all receipts  and  disbursements made  on
   [her] account or by [her] in this transaction."
 
                                                                   2
 
        The agency  contends that the  expense in  question was  for
   mortgage  insurance.   Accordingly, it  claims  that it  properly
   disallowed the claim under the FTR.
 
                               Discussion
 
        According   to   the   FTR,  while   an   FHA   or  Veterans
   Administration (VA) fee  for a loan application  is reimbursable,
   mortgage insurance is not.  41  CFR 302-6.2(d)(1)(i),(2)(i).  The
   FTR  does,  however,  allow   reimbursement  for  mortgage  title
   insurance.  41 CFR 302-6.2(d)(1)(viii).
 
        Mortgage insurance  is distinguishable  from mortgage  title
   insurance in that the former insures the  lender against possible
   default  on the  mortgage  by  the  purchaser, while  the  latter
   insures   the  lender  against   any  possible  defects   in  the
   purchaser's title.   Michael  S. Kochmanski,  B-227503 (Aug.  20,
   1987).   Here, the settlement  sheet stated that the  expense was
   for  mortgage insurance; claimant  has not demonstrated  that the
   expense was  for a  reimbursable purpose as  defined by  the FTR,
   such as mortgage title insurance.  
 
        The  FTR   explicitly  denies  reimbursement   for  mortgage
   insurance,  and the  Comptroller General  consistently held  that
   mortgage insurance is not a reimbursable expense.  Bruce Wheeler,
   B-24962  (Jan. 19,  1993);  Michael S.  Kochmanski.   The  agency
   properly disallowed the claim.
 
                                 ___________________________________
                                 ANTHONY S. BORWICK
                                 Board Judge