B-150909, OCT. 26, 1965
Highlights
MIGUELINO: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED AUGUST 28. WHY YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO PAY FOR THE PERIODS YOU WERE ABSENT FROM DUTY WITHOUT LEAVE AND WHILE YOU WERE IN NAVAL CUSTODY AFTER EXPIRATION OF YOUR ENLISTMENT. CONCERNING AN AMOUNT WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN OVERPAID WAS BASED ON A LETTER DATED MARCH 12. IN WHICH IT IS STATED THAT YOUR ACTIVE DUTY PAY RECORD WAS CLOSED WITH AN AMOUNT OVERPAID OF $1.
B-150909, OCT. 26, 1965
TO MR. EDUARDO A. MIGUELINO:
FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED AUGUST 28, 1965, AGAIN REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF YOUR CLAIM FOR ARREARS OF PAY FOR PERIODS OF UNAUTHORIZED ABSENCE SUBSEQUENT TO YOUR ENLISTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY ON OCTOBER 30, 1945.
WE EXPLAINED IN DETAIL IN OUR DECISIONS B-150909 OF MARCH 18 AND JUNE 21, 1963, WHY YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO PAY FOR THE PERIODS YOU WERE ABSENT FROM DUTY WITHOUT LEAVE AND WHILE YOU WERE IN NAVAL CUSTODY AFTER EXPIRATION OF YOUR ENLISTMENT. YOUR RECENT LETTER PRESENTS NO MATERIAL FACTS OR EVIDENCE NOT PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED AND HENCE AFFORDS NO GROUNDS FOR MODIFICATION OF OUR FINDING IN THE MATTER.
THE STATEMENT MADE IN OUR LETTER OF JUNE 21, 1963, CONCERNING AN AMOUNT WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN OVERPAID WAS BASED ON A LETTER DATED MARCH 12, 1963, FROM THE UNITED STATES NAVY FINANCE CENTER, CLEVELAND, OHIO, IN WHICH IT IS STATED THAT YOUR ACTIVE DUTY PAY RECORD WAS CLOSED WITH AN AMOUNT OVERPAID OF $1,081.56.