B-120919, OCT. 21, 1955

B-120919, OCT. 21, 1955

TO MR. HARRY D. MILLER:

YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 8, 1955, REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 5, 1955, SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION ALLEGED TO BE DUE FOR OVERTIME SERVICES RENDERED AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, PORTLAND, OREGON, WHILE ASSIGNED TO TEMPORARY DUTY AT ATASCOSA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, NEAR BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS, DURING JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 1948.

YOUR LETTER PRESENTS NO NEW OR MATERIAL FACTS NOT HERETOFORE CONSIDERED, AND INASMUCH AS OUR OFFICE FULLY CONSIDERED YOUR CASE IN THE DECISION OF AUGUST 5, 1955, TO YOU, SETTING OUT IN DETAIL WHY YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION ALLEGED TO BE DUE FOR OVERTIME SERVICES RENDERED, IT WOULD BE NEEDLESS REPETITION TO RESTATE THE CASE IN DETAIL HERE.

IT STILL APPEARS TO BE YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOU WERE ORDERED AND AUTHORIZED TO WORK TEN HOURS DAILY BY MR. A. A. REIMER, CHIEF OF BRANCH OF LANDS, WASHINGTON, D.C., AND BY MR. T. H. CONRADY, REGIONAL SUPERVISOR. REGARDING THE STATEMENT IN YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 18, 1955, THAT YOU WERE AUTHORIZED TO AND DID WORK OVERTIME WHILE DETAILED TO BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS, THERE IS ON FILE IN OUR OFFICE AN ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. AT THE TIME THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT WAS REQUESTED THERE WAS FORWARDED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, FOR CONSIDERATION, YOUR LETTER OF APPEAL DATED APRIL 26, 1955, AND THE TWO PHOTOSTATIC COPIES OF AFFIDAVITS EXECUTED BY TWO OTHER INDIVIDUALS EMPLOYED ON THE PROJECT ON WHICH YOU WORKED, WHO CERTIFIED THAT THEY WERE REQUIRED TO RENDER OVERTIME SERVICES DURING JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 1948, AND THAT THE OFFICIAL TIMESHEETS WERE ALL ADJUSTED TO SHOW THAT ONLY 40 HOURS OF SERVICES WERE RENDERED EACH WEEK. UNDER DATE OF JUNE 29, 1955, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR REPORTED AS FOLLOWS:

"WE CAN ADD NOTHING TO OUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 1, 1951 IN SUBSTANTIATION OR REFUTATION OF MR. MILLER'S CLAIM. WE CAN ONLY REPEAT THERE IS NO OFFICIAL RECORD SHOWING THAT MR. MILLER WORKED OVERTIME DURING THE PERIODS IN QUESTION OR THAT HE WAS DIRECTED TO DO SO. ACCORDINGLY, THERE IS NO BASIS ON WHICH WE ARE ABLE TO RECOMMEND ALLOWANCE OF MR. MILLER'S CLAIM.'

OUR OFFICE HAS NO FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS HERE INVOLVED AND, NECESSARILY, MUST RELY UPON THE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE. YOU HAVE FURNISHED NO EVIDENCE THAT YOU WERE AUTHORIZED IN WRITING TO PERFORM OVERTIME WORK DURING THE PERIOD IN QUESTION OTHER THAN YOUR UNSUPPORTED DECLARATION TO THAT EFFECT, WHICH IS INSUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT.