Board of Contract Appeals General Services Administration Washington, D.C. 20405 _______________________________________________ March 20, 2000 _______________________________________________ GSBCA 15209-RELO In the Matter of WALTER L. JONES, SR. Walter L. Jones, Sr., Las Vegas, NV, Claimant. Charles N. Stockwell, Directorate of Travel and Vendor Pay, Defense Finance and Accounting Service, Denver, CO, appearing for Department of Defense. BORWICK, Board Judge. Claimant, Walter L. Jones, Sr., a civilian employee of the Department of the Air Force, seeks temporary quarters subsistence expense (TQSE) reimbursement for a supplemental or amended voucher. The agency had deemed claimant entitled to TQSE reimbursement of $2850.20 based on the lodging, meal, laundry and mileage cost on claimant's original voucher. Claimant later sought $5652.76, which was $2802.56 more than the entitlement of $2850.20. The agency denied claimant's request for lack of substantiation. We sustain the decision of the agency, since the agency acted correctly in denying the supplemental request. Claimant has not substantiated that he actually incurred the costs, as required by the Joint Travel Regulations (JTR). The facts are as follows. On June 15, 1999, claimant received travel orders for a permanent change of station (PCS) from McClellan Air Force Base (AFB), California, to Nellis AFB, Nevada. The travel orders authorized sixty days of TQSE for him and his family, which consisted of two dependents. Claimant was provided an advance of $3254.59. Claimant chose the actual expense method of reimbursement for TQSE (TQSE(AE)). Claimant's first thirty days of TQSE ended on or about August 15, 1999. On August 17, claimant submitted a reimbursement voucher for his first thirty days of TQSE. Claimant did not substantiate his expenditures with receipts. Based upon the voucher submitted, the agency determined that claimant was entitled to TQSE of $2850.20 for lodging, meals, laundry and mileage; subtracting the amount of an advance payment and other adjustments, the agency determined that claimant was indebted to the agency for $1272.52. The agency now states that correction of computational errors renders claimant indebted for $502. On August 30, claimant submitted an amended request for TQSE. Claimant sought reimbursement of $5652.76, with considerable increase in the meal costs stated in his original voucher. For example, for the first day of TQSE, on July 17, 1999, claimant sought in his first voucher $14.20, $13.50, and $22.50 for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, respectively. In his amended voucher, claimant sought $35.66, $40.52, and $57.45 for those meals on that day. The amended voucher listed names of restaurants and the alleged total cost for each breakfast, lunch, and dinner for his family, but does not state by whom the meals were consumed. Claimant provided no receipts or other substantiation for the additional amounts. On October 12, 1999, the financial services officer at Nellis AFB, relying on the JTR, determined that he would not approve additional reimbursement based on the amended voucher because of a lack of supporting documentation. On November 3, 1999, the financial services officer advised the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS): AFR 177-103, 15017c, states that receipts may be required to substantiate claims when costs appear to be excessive. Since Mr. Jones does not have any receipts to substantiate the supplemental claim, and since the costs themselves were somewhat excessive, I decided to deny reimbursement. I realize that Mr. Jones probably had good intentions on his initial claim, but since he cannot substantiate the increased amounts, I would recommend that he not be reimbursed for the difference between the supplemental claim and the original claim. Claimant explained why he submitted an amended voucher: I didn't keep any records because I was informed that none were necessary. I spent the money for food and shelter for my family. Unaware that my vouchers needed to match exactly the money spent, I turned in figures that were not necessarily all inclusive of all foods and miscellaneous. It was only after [the first] voucher that I realized I had handled the monies improperly. According to claimant, he called personnel at McClellan AFB to "correct the situation" and was advised to submit an addendum to his first voucher. He notes, "Obviously, since McClellan did not require any receipts I was not going to have any for the addendum. Yet, Nellis was asking for documentation. I have none." The pertinent portion of the JTR provides that reimbursement for TQSE(AE) is limited to actual expenses incurred, up to the maximum authorized or approved, providing the expenses are directly related to temporary quarters occupancy, are reasonable in amount and substantiated. JTR C13215-A.3.a-c (Mar. 1, 1999). Receipts and a written supporting statement must accompany a TQSE(AE) claim as provided in subparagraphs 2 and 3. JTR C13220- A.1. Receipts are required for the cost of quarters, showing location, dates, and by whom occupied; and for any single expense of $75 or more (including meal expenses). A supporting statement must include a) the cost of each meal, for each day, by date, and where and by whom consumed; b) travel status and temporary quarters occupancy (for subsistence expense purposes) that occur the same day, the date and time of arrival and/or departure at the temporary quarters location; and c) the date the permanent quarters occupancy starts, or the date household goods are moved into quarters. JTR C13220-A.3. Construing the similar provision of the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR), in Paul W. Johnson, GSBCA 13815-RELO, 98-1 BCA 29,407 (1997), we sustained the agency's denial of the claimant's supplemental voucher for TQSE. We noted that the FTR requires that if the expense claimed had not been actually incurred, then the agency cannot reimburse the claimant. We concluded that the FTR requires "contemporaneous itemization of expenses when one has been authorized TQSE." In Johnson, the claimant's amounts were admittedly estimates. Here, the JTR permits reimbursement only of expenses actually incurred and requires, at the least, a written supporting statement containing the required elements. As with the FTR, we consider that the requirement for a supporting statement is to reflect contemporaneous (with the incurrence of the expenses) itemization of expenses. While the amended voucher in this instance on its face contains some of the elements of the "supporting statement," required by the JTR, the agency was properly skeptical that the amended voucher reflects claimant's actual expenses incurred, given the lesser amounts on the first voucher that the agency had accepted as the basis for entitlement. If the amended claim had reflected a contemporaneous recording of meal and other expenses, the agency properly asked why claimant had not submitted those expenses in his original voucher. In this context, even though the JTR require receipts only for single expenses over $75, the agency's demand for substantiation of the amended voucher through receipts or through other documentation is reasonable. The claim is denied. __________________________ ANTHONY S. BORWICK Board Judge