B-171281, JUL 17, 1972
Highlights
THE CLAIM WAS DENIED BECAUSE NO APPLICATION FOR REEMPLOYMENT WAS SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN MADE. HARDY TO THE EFFECT THAT WHILE HE WAS AN EMPLOYEE IN THE EMPLOYMENT OFFICE OF THE U.S. SINCE IT WAS NOT MADE UNTIL MORE THAN 5 YEARS AFTER THE TIME CLAIMANT ALLEGEDLY APPLIED FOR REEMPLOYMENT. THIS EVIDENCE IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT. IS CORRECT. THE CLAIM IS DENIED. MORRIS: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 6. THE FACTS IN YOUR CASE ARE SET FORTH IN OUR DECISION OF MARCH 3. WILL NOT BE REPEATED IN DETAIL HERE. OUR DETERMINATIONS WERE BASED ON THE FACT THAT YOU HAD NOT SUBMITTED EVIDENCE TO OVERCOME THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT WHICH INDICATED THAT THERE WAS NO RECORD OF A WRITTEN APPLICATION HAVING BEEN MADE BY YOU FOR RESTORATION TO YOUR FORMER POSITION AND THAT NOBODY COULD RECALL HAVING RECEIVED A VERBAL REQUEST THEREFOR.
B-171281, JUL 17, 1972
CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE - REEMPLOYMENT AFTER MILITARY DUTY - APPLICATION REQUIREMENT DECISION AFFIRMING DENIAL OF THE CLAIM (SEE B-171281 OF MARCH 3, 1971) OF MR. WILLIAM A. MORRIS FOR BACK PAY ALLEGEDLY DUE AS A RESULT OF FAILURE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY TO RESTORE HIM TO THE POSITION HE HELD PRIOR TO HIS CALL TO DUTY AS A RESERVIST. THE CLAIM WAS DENIED BECAUSE NO APPLICATION FOR REEMPLOYMENT WAS SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN MADE. CLAIMANT NOW INTRODUCES A STATEMENT OF MR. MERRITT T. HARDY TO THE EFFECT THAT WHILE HE WAS AN EMPLOYEE IN THE EMPLOYMENT OFFICE OF THE U.S. NAVAL AIR STATION, PENSACOLA, FLA., CLAIMANT CAME TO HIS OFFICE REQUESTING REEMPLOYMENT SOON AFTER HIS DISCHARGE FROM ACTIVE DUTY. SINCE MR. HARDY'S STATEMENT CONCERNS A MATTER OVER WHICH HE HAD NO JURISDICTION, AND SINCE IT WAS NOT MADE UNTIL MORE THAN 5 YEARS AFTER THE TIME CLAIMANT ALLEGEDLY APPLIED FOR REEMPLOYMENT, THIS EVIDENCE IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT, WHICH SHOWED NO APPLICATION, IS CORRECT. THEREFORE, THE CLAIM IS DENIED.
TO MR. WILLIAM A. MORRIS:
FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 6, 1972, REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF YOUR CLAIM FOR BACK PAY FOR FAILURE TO BE RESTORED TO THE POSITION YOU HELD WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY WHEN ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY AS A RESERVIST, IN ACCORDANCE WITH 5 U.S.C. 3551.
THE FACTS IN YOUR CASE ARE SET FORTH IN OUR DECISION OF MARCH 3, 1971, B- 171281, SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR BACK PAY FOR THE PERIOD NOVEMBER 1, 1966, TO MAY 1, 1967, AND WILL NOT BE REPEATED IN DETAIL HERE. OUR DETERMINATIONS WERE BASED ON THE FACT THAT YOU HAD NOT SUBMITTED EVIDENCE TO OVERCOME THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT WHICH INDICATED THAT THERE WAS NO RECORD OF A WRITTEN APPLICATION HAVING BEEN MADE BY YOU FOR RESTORATION TO YOUR FORMER POSITION AND THAT NOBODY COULD RECALL HAVING RECEIVED A VERBAL REQUEST THEREFOR. YOU HAVE SUBMITTED WITH YOUR LATEST LETTER A STATEMENT FROM A MR. MERRITT T. HARDY TO THE EFFECT THAT WHILE HE WAS EMPLOYED IN THE EMPLOYMENT OFFICE OF THE U.S. NAVAL AIR STATION, PENSACOLA, FLORIDA, YOU CAME INTO THAT OFFICE SOON AFTER YOUR SEPARATION FROM THE MILITARY SERVICE REQUESTING REEMPLOYMENT.
THE NAVAL AIR STATION, PURSUANT TO OUR REQUEST FOR A SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT, HAS ADVISED THAT MR. HARDY IS A FORMER EMPLOYEE OF ITS CIVILIAN PERSONNEL OFFICE WHO HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH REEMPLOYMENT CASES. THE STATION ALSO ADVISES THAT YOU MADE YOUR CLAIM INITIALLY ABOUT 2 YEARS AGO AND NEVER ONCE MENTIONED PERSONNEL YOU HAD TALKED WITH IN THE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL OFFICE UNTIL OVER 1 YEAR AFTER YOUR INITIAL CLAIM. TWO OF THE INDIVIDUALS MENTIONED INDICATED PREVIOUSLY THAT THEY HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF ANY APPLICATION.
SINCE MR. HARDY'S STATEMENT CONCERNS A MATTER OVER WHICH HE HAD NO JURISDICTION AND WAS NOT MADE UNTIL MORE THAN 5 YEARS AFTER THE TIME YOU STATE THAT YOU APPLIED FOR REEMPLOYMENT, WE CANNOT CONSIDER THAT IT IS OF SUFFICIENT EVIDENTIARY VALUE TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS ARE CORRECT.
IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE WE AFFIRM OUR PREVIOUS ACTIONS DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM.