October 30, 1997
                                                  


                             GSBCA 14154-TRAV


                    In the Matter of DONALD E. GUENTHER


     Donald E. Guenther, Munich, Germany, Claimant.

     Paul Wolfe, Personnel Director, Department of Defense
Education Activity, Arlington, VA, appearing for Department of
Defense.

DANIELS, Board Judge (Chairman).

     For many years, Donald E. Guenther was a teacher in
Department of Defense (DOD) overseas dependents schools in
Germany.  In 1996, Mr. Guenther realized that he may not have
been reimbursed for costs of renewal agreement travel performed
by himself and return travel performed by his daughter during
1992.  He asked the DOD Education Activity (DODEA), which
administers the schools, to make this reimbursement.  DODEA has
not complied with his request.

     We hold that the claimant is entitled to reimbursement for
both kinds of travel, as limited by conditions specified in
travel orders issued to him, as long as (a) he provides proof
that he actually incurred the expenses he claims for the trips
and (b) the agency cannot demonstrate that it has already made
payment.

                                Background

     In July 1992, Mr. Guenther had completed a period of service
at DOD's Munich Elementary School and was about to begin service
at the agency's Babenhausen, Germany, Elementary School.  He
asked the DOD Dependents Schools - Germany to authorize him to
travel from Germany to Orlando, Florida, and back, and his
twenty-two-year-old daughter, Annemarie, to return to the United
States.  His request was approved by his supervisor, and funds
were certified by a DOD accountant as being available for the
travel.  

     Shortly thereafter, DOD issued an order authorizing Mr.
Guenther to make the renewal agreement travel.  This order says,
"Reimbursement will be made as long as travel is performed on an
American Flag Carrier and will be limited to costs of normal mode
(MAC) via most direct route from o/s duty station to HOR."  These
orders do not mention Mr. Guenther's daughter.

     The record also contains another order regarding the travel
that is the subject of this claim.  This document, dated January
31, 1996, contains the following remarks:  "Travel to commence
o/a 01 Aug 92.  Return travel to commence o/a 17 Aug 92. 
Confirmatory order issued IAW JTR C3051 to authorize one-way
return travel to CONUS only for dependent daughter."  The order
was requested by a DOD personnel assistant and approved by an
agency personnel staffing specialist.  Fiscal concurrence was
withheld, however.

     Mr. Guenther states, and DODEA does not deny, that the
travel involved in this case was actually performed during 1992.

                                Discussion

     Once a civilian employee of DOD has satisfactorily completed
an agreed period of service at a post of duty outside the
continental United States (CONUS), and has entered into a new
written agreement for another period of service at the same or
another post of duty outside CONUS, the employee is eligible for
"renewal agreement travel" -- a trip home to take leave between
the two tours -- at Government expense.  JTR C4150-64; see also
5 U.S.C.  5728(a) (1988); 41 CFR 302-1.13 (1992).  Mr. Guenther
was entitled to reimbursement of the cost of his trip from
Germany to Orlando and back under this authority.  George E.
Lingle, GSBCA 13946-TRAV (Sept. 18, 1997).

     The JTR also provide that "[i]f a dependent of an employee
reaches [his or her] 21st birthday while an employee is assigned
to duty overseas, such former dependent is entitled to return
travel to the employee's place of actual residence in the United
States provided the last travel overseas was at Government
expense as the employee's dependent."  JTR C7003.A; see also JTR
C7004.A, .B; 5 U.S.C.  5729(b).  Mr. Guenther was entitled to
reimbursement of the cost of his daughter's return trip to the
United States under this authority.

     DODEA's response to Mr. Guenther's claim does not address
the question raised -- whether the claimant may be reimbursed for
the cost of the trips taken by him and his daughter.  It merely
says that the JTR establish a "2-year period of time in which the
orders may be used," and that "Mr. Guenther's request to amend
his [return agreement travel] orders [to include authorization
for his daughter's travel] was denied."

     DODEA misunderstands the nature of the claim.  It is true
that the JTR require that generally, travel must be performed
within two years of the effective date of an employee's transfer
or appointment.  JTR C1057; see also 41 CFR 302-1.6; JTR
C7002.G.1 (as to dependent travel).  Mr. Guenther is not asking
for permission to travel now on 1992 orders, however; he is
asking to be reimbursed for the costs of travel which was
approved, funded, and performed in 1992.  The regulations and
statutes cited above contain no limitation on the time when
reimbursement may be requested.  Statute does establish a time
bar on claims like this one -- six years from the date on which
the claim accrues, 31 U.S.C.  3702(b)(1) -- but that limitation
is not applicable here, since Mr. Guenther filed his claim within
the specified time.

     A regulation which is relevant to the matter raised is the
one cited in the January 31, 1996, order, JTR C3051.  This rule
allows the issuance of confirmatory travel orders -- involving
travel which was properly authorized before it was made, but was
not the subject of an actual travel order.  Writing a
confirmatory order for the travel of Mr. Guenther's daughter was
appropriate, since in advance of that travel authorization was
properly given and funds were certified as being available, but,
apparently due to administrative error, the trip was not included
in the original order permitting the claimant's renewal agreement
travel.  Nothing in the record of this case supports the
determination of agency fiscal officials not to concur in the
confirmatory order.

     Mr. Guenther maintains that DODEA owes him $1,350 for the
costs he incurred in connection with his own return agreement
travel and his daughter's return travel to the United States.  As
stated at the beginning of this decision, he cannot be reimbursed 
for these expenses unless he presents proof, such as receipts,
that he actually incurred these costs.  JTR C5003, C5004.N.5.  Of
course, Mr. Guenther also should not be reimbursed if the agency
can demonstrate that it has already paid him for this travel.





                                   _________________________
                                   STEPHEN M. DANIELS
                                   Board Judge