Board of Contract Appeals
                 General Services Administration
                      Washington, D.C. 20405

                                                 

                           July 9, 2003
                                                 

                         GSBCA 16120-TRAV

                 In the Matter of RONALD MAJTYKA

     Ronald Majtyka, Mineral, VA, Claimant.

     Deborah Osipchak, Manager, Travel and Payroll Services Branch, AFM-330, Office
of the Assistant Administrator for Financial Services and Chief Financial Officer, Federal
Aviation Administration, Washington, DC, appearing for Department of Transportation.

DANIELS, Board Judge (Chairman).

     Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) management directed certain employees of
the Washington Air Route Traffic Control Center, including Ronald Majtyka, to stay
overnight at a private establishment near their workplace during a major snowstorm in
February 2003.  The agency's accounting division has determined that reimbursing the
employees for the cost of the lodging would be improper.  The agency asks whether it may
make payment.

     The Board's authority to settle claims of or against the Government is limited to
"claims involving expenses incurred by Federal civilian employees for official travel and
transportation, and for relocation expenses incident to transfers of official duty station."  31
U.S.C.   3702(a)(3) (2000); GSA Order ADMP5450.39C CHGE 78, ch. 12(a)(2) (Mar. 21,
2002).  We therefore answer the FAA's question only insofar as it seeks authority to make
payment for the lodging costs as travel expenses.

     The FAA notes, in seeking authorization to pay for the lodging, that if the employees
had not lodged near their workplace, the ability of the Washington Center to perform its
important mission could have been badly impaired.  The Center's air traffic services are 
essential to ensuring the continued safe operation of the portions of the National Airspace
System feeding the Washington, D.C., and New York City metropolitan areas.  The Center's
services also support combat air patrols in the airspace over Washington, D.C., and
Philadelphia.  The Center could not have been closed during the snowstorm, as non-critical
federal offices were.  Having the employees close by, at a time when travel from home to
work was extremely difficult, made possible continued operation.  The agency notes that it
conceivably could have achieved such operation by having other employees work double-
shifts.  This alternative would have been considerably more expensive than paying for the
lodging, however.

     Although the decision to require the employees to spend nights near their workplace
may have been good management, it does not justify paying for the costs of the lodging as
travel expenses.  The Administrator of the FAA is authorized by Congress to "develop and
implement . . . a personnel management system for the [FAA] that addresses the unique
demands on the agency's workforce."  Pub. L. No. 104-50,   347, 109 Stat. 436, 460 (1995). 
The Administrator has implemented this requirement, as to employee travel, by issuing the
Federal Aviation Administration Travel Policy (FAATP).  James W. Respess, GSBCA
15532-RELO, 01-2 BCA   31,450.  The FAATP allows reimbursement for subsistence
expenses, including lodging, only to employees who perform official travel away from their
official stations.  FAATP 301-11.1.  An "official station" is "[t]he corporate limits of the city
or town where the employee is stationed" or, if the employee is not stationed in an
incorporated city or town, "[t]he reservation, station, or other established area . . . having
definite boundaries within which the employee is stationed."  FAATP 301-1.4.  An employee
who spends the night at a private, commercial establishment near his duty station is clearly
not away from that station, so the costs of his lodging may not be reimbursed as travel
expenses.

     We note that the same result obtains for federal employees who are subject to the
regulation on which the FAATP appears to be modeled, the Federal Travel Regulation:  costs
of an employee's lodging at his official station may not be reimbursed as travel expenses, no
matter how sensible the decision to have the employees stay the night at private, commercial
establishments.  Jerry B. Dulworth, GSBCA 16035-TRAV, et al. (Apr. 22, 2003) (spending
night in hotel allowed employees to perform five days' work in two); Leo McManus, GSBCA
15549-TRAV, 01-2 BCA   31,507 (staying overnight in hotel enabled employees to save cost
of separate trips by meeting with contractors both late at night and early the next morning);
Murray Lumpkin, GSBCA 14513-TRAV, 98-2 BCA   30,042 (staying near office during
snowstorm ensured the employee could be at next day's training session for which he was
responsible); Herman T. Whitworth, GSBCA 14401-TRAV, 98-2 BCA   29,804 (after
employee traveled or worked for eighteen consecutive hours, he finished a working dinner
after 10 p.m. and, by avoiding long trip home, was able to participate in 7 a.m. meeting next
day).

     By deciding that, pursuant to the FAATP, the FAA may not pay as travel expenses the
lodging costs incurred by Mr. Majtyka and similarly-situated employees, we are not
precluding the agency from reimbursing these costs.  Whether the FAA has other authority
to pay for the costs, which the employees clearly incurred at the direction of their managers
and for the purpose of furthering their Center's mission, is beyond the scope we are permitted
to examine.

                                   _________________________ 
                                   STEPHEN M. DANIELS
                                   Board Judge