_____________________________ March 7, 1997 _____________________________ GSBCA 13851-RELO In the Matter of THERESA F. ZUBER Theresa F. Zuber, Warren, MI, Claimant. Ronda A. Jones, United States Army Tank Automotive and Armaments Command, Warren, MI, appearing for Department of the Army. HYATT, Board Judge. Claimant, Theresa F. Zuber, a civilian employee of the Department of the Army, seeks reimbursement of real estate expenses incurred in connection with her permanent change of station from Germany to Warren, Michigan. In particular, she challenges the Army's determination that she is ineligible to be reimbursed for closing expenses incurred in the purchase of a home at her new duty station in Michigan. For the reasons stated, we conclude that Ms. Zuber is not eligible to be reimbursed for these expenses. Background In April 1982, Ms. Zuber was selected for a non-appropriated fund (NAF) position as a Recreation Specialist at the United States Army Installation Command in Heilbronn, Germany. At that time she was living in New Jersey and was self-employed, although she had previously been employed in the NAF system by the Department of Defense for approximately eight and one-half years. After moving to Europe at Government expense, Ms. Zuber advanced to the position of Community Recreation Division Chief. In 1988, Ms. Zuber was notified that her position was to be converted from the NAF to the GS system. Ms. Zuber agreed to convert to the GS system in order to maintain her employment in this position. In 1994, Ms. Zuber, concerned about the continuing prospects of employment with the Army in Europe, enrolled in the priority placement program and sought a position in the United States. Under this program, the employee must accept the first position offered (regardless of location) or risk a break in service at the completion of the term of the overseas assignment. Ms. Zuber was offered a position with the Army in Warren, Michigan, which she accepted. Upon arrival in Michigan, Ms. Zuber undertook to locate suitable housing. She was informed that as an employee relocating for the convenience of the Government she would be eligible for reimbursement of certain costs associated with the purchase of a house. Relying on this advice, claimant chose to purchase a house rather than lease an apartment. She located and purchased a house, and then contacted the Civilian Personnel Servicing Center to inquire about the procedures for obtaining reimbursement of eligible expenses. At that time, claimant was told that under paragraph C14001-C of the Joint Travel Regulations (JTR) she was ineligible for this allowance because she was not employed by the Federal Government at the time she accepted the assignment in Germany. Ms. Zuber has asked us to review this determination. Discussion The authority to reimburse the expenses of the sale or purchase of real estate by a transferring employee is set forth in 5 U.S.C.  5724a(4)(a) (1994). This statutory provision provides for reimbursement of expenses required to be paid by the employee . . . of the purchase of a residence at the new official station when the employee is transferred in the interest of the Government from a post of duty located outside the United States . . . to an official station (other than the one from which he was transferred when assigned to the foreign tour of duty) within the United States. (emphasis added). Prior to the enactment in 1987 of Public Law 100-202, which amended the statute quoted above, real estate expenses incurred by civilian employees transferring from an overseas post to a new duty station in the United States, or certain specified territories and areas, were not reimbursable. Rather, reimbursement of such expenses was available only when the old and new duty stations were located within the United States. This language was added to the statute, at the recommendation of the General Accounting Office, to remedy financial hardships suffered by employees who served intervening tours of duty overseas and returned to the United States to duty stations other than the ones from which they were transferred. See B-199549 (Mar. 30, 1987). Applicable provisions of the Federal Travel Regulation and the JTR echo the language of the statute and provide for reimbursement only where the employee was stationed first in the United States, sent overseas for the convenience of the Government, and then returned to a different location in the United States. 41 CFR 302- 6.1(g) (1994); JTR C14000-C. To illustrate the narrow application of this language, GAO held that an employee who transferred overseas for personal convenience is not eligible to recoup real estate transaction expenses upon a retransfer to the United States for the convenience of the Government. Michael D. Merritt, 69 Comp. Gen. 559 (1990). Under the statute, both transfers to and from the overseas post must have been in the interest of the Government. Claimant points out that she was told upon her transfer to Warren, Michigan that she would be reimbursed for expenses of purchasing a home up to five percent of the cost of the home purchased and that she would not otherwise have purchased a home. Such advice is not binding on the Government, however. Although we understand that an employee's reasonable reliance upon erroneous guidance will sometimes lead to an unfair result, the Board is unable to authorize payment of amounts that are not permitted under applicable law. See, e.g., Samuel L. Marr, GSBCA 14039-RELO, at 6- 7 (Jan. 16, 1997); Kevin S. Foster, GSBCA 13639-RELO, 97-1 BCA  28,688, at 143,294 (1996). This is such a case. ______________________________ CATHERINE B. HYATT Board Judge