________________________ May 8, 1997 ________________________ GSBCA 13729-RELO In the Matter of INGRID RODENBERG Ingrid Rodenberg, APO AE, Claimant. E. Boswell-Mackay, Director, Heidelberg Regional Finance and Accounting Office, Department of the Army, Heidelberg, Germany, appearing for Department of the Army. DeGRAFF, Board Judge. In June 1995, Ingrid Rodenberg, a civilian employee of the Department of the Army, made a permanent change of station from Heidelberg, Germany, to Rotterdam, The Netherlands. In connection with the transfer, the Army authorized Ms. Rodenberg to ship a maximum of 18,000 pounds of household goods to her new duty station. Ms. Rodenberg's application for shipment of her household goods contains a space for listing the weight of professional books and papers, and the word "none" is typed in this space. In July 1995, Ms. Rodenberg's household goods were shipped uncrated from Heidelberg to Rotterdam. The household goods inventory lists books among the items moved, but does not identify any professional books. Ms. Rodenberg signed the inventory twice, both before and after the move occurred. The Government bill of lading (GBL) shows the tare weight of the truck and trailer used to haul Ms. Rodenberg's household goods as 22,311 pounds and the gross weight as 41,717 pounds. The difference, 19,406 pounds, is shown as the net weight of the shipment. The GBL contains a space to be completed with the weight of professional books and papers, and this space is blank. On October 31, 1995, the Army notified Ms. Rodenberg that the weight of her household goods (19,406 pounds) exceeded the authorized weight (18,000 pounds). The Army calculated that Ms. Rodenberg owed $631.92 in excess weight charges and asked Ms. Rodenberg to refund that amount. Ms. Rodenberg submitted a claim to the General Accounting Office (GAO), contending that she does not owe the excess weight charges assessed by the Army. On July 17, 1996, this claim and all others involving expenses incurred by federal civilian employees for official travel and transportation were transferred from GAO to the General Services Board of Contract Appeals. Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-53,  211, 109 Stat. 514, 535 (1995); Determination by Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget (June 28, 1996); Delegation of Authority from the Acting Administrator of General Services (July 17, 1996). The authority to settle these claims has more recently been vested by statute in the Administrator of General Services. General Accounting Office Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-316,  202(n), 110 Stat. 3826, 3843 (1996). Ms. Rodenberg does not believe that the weight of her household goods exceeded 18,000 pounds. Her previous move was in October 1994, and the weight of her household goods during that move was 14,222 pounds. Ms. Rodenberg says that her "household did not increase" between October 1994 and July 1995, and so she does not understand how the weight of her household goods could have increased during that time. In addition, Ms. Rodenberg says that the net weight of her shipment should be reduced by ten percent to allow for the weight of packing materials. Finally, Ms. Rodenberg says that she shipped seventeen boxes of professional books and papers in July 1995. The household goods inventory list for her move in October 1994 stated that several boxes contained professional books and papers and listed the weight of each box. Ms. Rodenberg says that the net weight of her household goods shipment should be reduced by 790 pounds, which is the weight of the boxes of professional books and papers shown on the October 1994 household goods inventory list. Congress authorized agencies to reimburse employees for the expenses of transporting household goods "not in excess of 18,000 pounds net weight." 5 U.S.C.  5724(a)(2) (1994). This statutory provision is implemented in the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR). The FTR is supplemented by the Joint Travel Regulations (JTR), which apply to civilian employees of the Department of Defense. The FTR and the JTR explain how to determine the net weight of a shipment. The net weight of an uncrated shipment is the weight shown on the GBL. 41 CFR 302-8.2(c)(1) (1995); JTR C8000-B1. Even though Ms. Rodenberg does not believe that the weight of her household goods exceeded 18,000 pounds, the weight shown on the GBL is controlling and the GBL for Ms. Rodenberg's shipment establishes that the net weight of her household goods was 19,406 pounds. These same FTR and JTR sections provide that the net weight of an uncrated shipment includes the weight of materials used in packing, and so Ms. Rodenberg is not entitled to a reduction in the net weight of her shipment to allow for packing materials. The FTR and the JTR explain that professional books and papers are those which are owned by an employee and used in the performance of the employee's official duties. The regulations explain that agencies cannot use travel and transportation funds to pay for shipping an employee s personally-owned professional books and papers if the weight of the professional books and papers is in addition to the 18,000 pound limitation imposed upon shipments of household goods. 41 CFR 302-8.2(b); JTR C8007. Assuming that Ms. Rodenberg shipped 790 pounds of professional books and papers, the Army cannot use travel and transportation funds to pay for shipping these items because their weight is in addition to the 18,000 pound statutory limitation. The FTR and the JTR also explain that agencies can use administrative expense funds to pay for shipping personally-owned professional books and papers that would cause the weight of the shipment to exceed 18,000 pounds, provided certain requirements are met. If an employee wants the agency to use administrative expense funds to pay for shipping professional books and papers, the employee is required to furnish an itemized inventory of the books and papers to an authorizing official at the new duty station, and to establish that transporting the items would make the shipment of household goods exceed the 18,000 pound net weight limitation. The authorizing official will review the list and certify that the professional books and papers are necessary for the employee to perform his duties at the new duty station, and that the same or similar items will have to be obtained at Government expense if they are not transported to the new duty station. If professional books and papers are part of the employee's shipment of household goods, they are supposed to be packed and weighed separately, and the weight and the source of administrative expense funds is supposed to be stated on the GBL. 41 CFR 302-8.2(b); JTR C8007. Ms. Rodenberg has not established that the Army is required to use its administrative expense funds to pay for shipping any professional books and papers. Ms. Rodenberg's application for moving her household goods stated that no professional books or papers were included. She twice signed an inventory list that did not identify any professional books or papers and the GBL did not list the weight of any professional books or papers. Ms. Rodenberg did not comply with any of the requirements for using administrative expense funds to pay for moving professional books and papers. As the result of Ms. Rodenberg's actions, the Army never had the opportunity to determine whether the items being shipped were professional books and papers or how much those items weighed. The Army never had the chance to decide whether it should pay to transport Ms. Rodenberg's books and papers, or whether it would be more cost effective to purchase new materials for her at her new duty station. Although Ms. Rodenberg's October 1994 household goods inventory list identifies 790 pounds of professional books and papers, the weight of the October 1994 shipment was less than 18,000 pounds and so the Army never had to determine whether there were actually 790 pounds of professional books and papers in the shipment or whether it would pay to ship those items instead of purchasing new materials for Ms. Rodenberg at her new duty station. Because Ms. Rodenberg did not show that her shipment of household goods contained 790 pounds of professional books and papers and that the Army would have used its funds to ship those items instead of purchasing new materials at her new duty station, she did not establish that the Army is required to use its administrative expense funds to pay for shipping 790 pounds of professional books and papers. Both the FTR and the JTR provide that if household goods in excess of 18,000 pounds are shipped using a GBL, the employee will pay for the cost of shipping the excess weight. 41 CFR 302- 8.4(e)(2); JTR C8002-B1. The net weight of Ms. Rodenberg's shipment was 19,406 pounds and Ms. Rodenberg is responsible for paying the costs for the excess weight of her shipment of household goods. Therefore, her claim is denied. ______________________________ MARTHA H. DeGRAFF Board Judge