Washington, DC
U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Compensation Claim Decision
Under section 3702 of title 31, United States Code
Rufus, Oregon
Damon B. Ford
Compensation and Leave Claims
Program Manager
Merit System Accountability and Compliance
10/02/2017
Date
The claimant is a Federal civilian employee of the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive & Armament Command (TACOM) in Anniston, Alabama. He requests $18,463.00 for a relocation incentive denied by the Portland District of the Army Corps of Engineers. We received the claim request on March 21, 2017. For the reasons discussed herein, the claim is denied.
The claimant applied for a Mechanical Engineer position with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in Rufus, Oregon, in February 2016, and was subsequently offered the position. The agency also offered a relocation incentive in the amount of $18,463.00, to be paid over the course of a four year service agreement after residency was established in Oregon. However, the agency’s offer of employment required the claimant to obtain a Government Travel Charge Card (GTCC) to cover the expenses of his permanent change of station move. The GTCC is mandated to be used by Department of Defense personnel to pay for authorized expenses when on official travel unless an exemption is granted. For reasons unknown, the claimant failed to obtain a GTCC. The claimant states that he was eligible for an exemption from the use of a GTCC. However, on August 15, 2016, the agency withdrew the offer of employment. In the claimant’s view he is still owed the $18,463.00 relocation incentive.
A relocation incentive may be paid to an employee who must: 1) relocate to a different geographic area to accept a covered position in an agency when the position is likely to be difficult to fill, and 2) is an employee of the Federal Government immediately before the relocation. (See 5 CFR 575.205(a).) In addition to establishing a residence in the new geographic location before the payment of a relocation incentive, an employee must maintain a residence in the new geographic location for the duration of the service agreement. (See 5 CFR 575.205(b).) A relocation incentive will be terminated for employees who fail to maintain a residence throughout the service agreement in the new geographic location. (See 5 CFR 575.211(b).) In this case, the agency chose to withdraw the job offer, and the claimant never in fact relocated. The claimant is not owed a relocation incentive because the regulatory requirements found in 5 CFR 575.205(a) and (b) have not been met. Moreover, a Federal employee is eligible only to the benefits of the position to which the employee is appointed.
The claims jurisdiction authority of OPM under 31 U.S.C. 3702(a)(2) is limited to consideration of whether the applicable statutes and regulations have been properly interpreted and applied in determining if monies are owed for the stated compensation or leave claim. It does not extend to complaints regarding declared exemptions from the required use of a GTCC card or the agency’s decision to withdraw an offer of employment. For the reasons stated above, the claimant has failed to state a claim on which relief can be granted. Accordingly, the claim is denied.
This settlement is final. No further administrative review is available within the OPM. Nothing in this settlement limits the claimant’s right to bring an action in an appropriate United States court.