Board of Contract Appeals General Services Administration Washington, D.C. 20405 _______________________________________________ February 24, 2000 _______________________________________________ GSBCA 15145-RELO In the Matter of ROBERT R. GOULKA Robert R. Goulka, Chicago, IL, Claimant. Thomas J. Stewart, Director, Travel Management Division, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC, appearing for Department of Housing and Urban Development. BORWICK, Board Judge. Claimant, Robert R. Goulka, applied for reimbursement of transaction expenses for the sale and purchase of real estate incident to a permanent change of station. His agency, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, denied the claims because claimant incurred the expenses more than three years after he reported for duty at his new station. We sustain the decision of the agency. The Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) limits reimbursement of expenses to those incurred not later than two years after the date the employee reported for duty, or three years, if the agency grants a one-year extension. The time limits may not be waived. The facts as indicated by the record are as follows. The agency transferred claimant from Milwaukee, Wisconsin to Chicago, Illinois, and claimant reported for duty on October 15, 1995. The initial two-year time period for incurring real estate transaction expenses expired on October 16, 1997. On September 15, 1997, claimant requested and was granted a one-year extension to complete all real estate transactions, making the time period end on October 16, 1998. Claimant provides the following explanation for his delay in consummating real estate transactions within the three-year period. Claimant states that due to change in family status, he could not get his financial affairs in order until October 1996. He then applied for a federal position in Los Angeles, California, and delayed purchasing a residence in Illinois until he found out whether he would be moving to California. He decided not to purchase a residence in Illinois to avoid incurring future relocation costs which would have been reimbursed by the Government. The selection panel for the prospective position met in April 1997, but claimant decided not to take the position. In August 1997, claimant, a member of the United States Army Reserve, was informed that he would be called to active duty to serve in Bosnia and Herzegovina for 252 days. He entered active duty on November 30, 1997, and stayed on active duty overseas until the end of July 1998. Claimant returned to his civilian federal employment the first week of August 1998. In September 1998, claimant was tentatively offered a re- transfer back to his old duty station in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He accepted the tentative offer, but in October 1998, "headquarters" rejected his transfer. He then began to seriously look for housing in Illinois. In May 1999, claimant found a house he wanted to purchase; closing took place on August 27, 1999. The FTR provides that reimbursement of real estate transaction expenses is available only if the settlement date of the sale or purchase of a residence occurs not later than two years after the date that the employee reported for duty at the new official station. 41 CFR 302-6.1(e) (1995). If an employee requests an extension of this period, the head of the agency (or a designee) may grant it, providing a determination is made that extenuating circumstances, acceptable to the agency concerned, have prevented the employee from completing the sale and purchase in the initial time frame and that the residence transaction is reasonably related to the transfer of official station. Id. 302- 6.1(e)(2). As we explained in Nannette O. Locke, GSBCA 15144- RELO (Nov. 30, 1999): As the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held, "Neither courts nor administrative agencies . . . have the authority to waive requirements (including filing deadlines) that Congress has imposed as a condition to the payment of federal money." Schoemakers v. Office of Personnel Management, 180 F.3d 1377, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 1999). Because the Federal Travel Regulation is issued under delegation from the Congress, it is a "legislative rule" with special weight. Its provisions, if within the granted power, issued pursuant to proper procedure, and reasonable as a matter of due process, are as binding on agencies as if they had been promulgated by the Congress itself. Lorrie L. Wood, GSBCA 13705-TRAV, 97-1 BCA 28,707 (1996) (citing 2 Kenneth Culp Davis, Administrative Law Treatise 36-43 (1979)); see 5 U.S.C. 5738(a)(1) (Supp. IV 1998). Thus, the three-year limit is invariable. Claimant's reasons for delay in consummating real estate transactions are understandable. Claimant's active duty service in Bosnia and Herzegovina was laudable. Nevertheless, neither executive agencies nor this Board have the authority to waive the time limitations. Thomas W. Schmidt, GSBCA 14747-RELO (Jan. 21, 2000). The decision of the agency is sustained. __________________________ ANTHONY S. BORWICK Board Judge