Board of Contract Appeals General Services Administration Washington, D.C. 20405 ____________________ March 14, 2000 _____________________ GSBCA 15192-RELO In the Matter of CARLOS L. EDWARDS Carlos L. Edwards, Washington, DC, Claimant. Dennis Gallagher, Assistant Legal Adviser, Department of State, Washington, DC, appearing for Department of State. PARKER, Board Judge. Carlos L. Edwards, an employee of the Department of State, has asked the Board to review his agency s decision not to reimburse him for the cost of shipping his privately owned vehicle (POV) to the United States for repairs. For the reasons discussed below, we hold that the State Department correctly denied Mr. Edwards claim. In September 1997, Mr. Edwards was transferred from Harare, Zimbabwe, to Dhaka, Bangladesh. He shipped his POV, a 1993 Cherokee Jeep, at Government expense. While in Dhaka, the vehicle developed a transmission problem which, according to Mr. Edwards, could not be repaired by anyone in Bangladesh. Mr. Edwards shipped the vehicle to Washington, D.C. for warranty repairs and requested reimbursement for the shipping costs. Discussion Section 901 of the Foreign Service Act, 22 U.S.C. 4081 (1994), authorizes the Secretary of State to: pay the travel and related expenses of members of the Service and their families, including costs and expenses incurred for- . . . . (13) transporting for or on behalf of a member of the Service, a privately owned motor vehicle in any case in which the Secretary determines that water, rail, or air transportation of the motor vehicle is necessary or expedient for all or any part of the distance between points of origin and destination, but transportation may be provided under this paragraph for only one motor vehicle of a member during any 48-month period while the member is continuously serving abroad, except that another motor vehicle may be so transported as a replacement for such motor vehicle if such replacement- (A) is determined, in advance, by the Secretary to be necessary for reasons beyond the control of the member and in the interest of the government, or (B) is incident to a reassignment when the cost of transporting the replacement motor vehicle does not exceed the cost of transporting the motor vehicle that is replaced. The statute thus allows shipment of one POV during a four-year period of overseas service and provides for shipment of a replacement vehicle under certain conditions. Mr. Edwards has already shipped the vehicle once during his current overseas assignment and has not requested reimbursement for shipping a replacement vehicle. Thus, we agree with the State Department that the statute does not appear to authorize the Secretary to pay for the return of Mr. Edwards POV to the United States for repairs. The agency s implementing regulations do not help Mr. Edwards case. Pursuant to the statute, the Secretary of State has promulgated Volume 6 of the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM). Section 165.1 of the regulation provides as follows: The cost of transporting a motor vehicle is allowable only when the POV is owned by the employee or an eligible family member. Except as provided in 6 FAM 165.3, 6 FAM 165.4, and 6 FAM 165.5, no expenses are allowed in excess of the cost of transportation between the authorized point of origin and destination or between the factory site and the authorized destination, whichever involves the lesser cost. Cost construction of a POV shipment may be allowed from an alternate origination point but will not be allowed to an alternate destination point. Shipment of a POV between domestic origination and domestic destination points may be authorized on a case by case basis. We do not see anything in this section (including the exceptions, which apply to shipments of vehicles to, rather than from, the employee s post of duty) that would provide authority to reimburse Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards points us to another section of the FAM, which provides as follows: The Department of State or agency may authorize or approve the advance shipment of an employee s furniture, household and personal effects, and privately owned motor vehicle from a post to employee s place of residence, or to an intermediate storage point, prior to the issuance of separation or transfer orders to the employee when advance travel has been authorized in accordance with 6 FAM 126.2, or when it is administratively determined that it is in the best interests of the Service. 6 FAM 168.1. This section of the FAM, however, authorizes the agency to ship a POV to the employee s residence in advance of an employee s separation or transfer, under certain conditions. It does not, as Mr. Edwards maintains, provide the agency with separate authority to pay for the shipment of a POV where there is no other authority for the shipment. Here, Mr. Edwards decided, on his own and without agency approval, to ship his POV back to the United States. Thus, there was no agency determination that the shipment was either an advance shipment incident to a separation or transfer or in the best interest of the agency. In these circumstances, the State Department correctly determined that the regulation does not provide authority for the shipment of Mr. Edwards POV back to the United States for warranty repairs. Decision For the reasons discussed above, the claim is denied. __________________________ ROBERT W. PARKER Board Judge