B-121561, NOV. 20, 1956

B-121561: Nov 20, 1956

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

GUEVARRA: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 21. WHICH SET FORTH THE REASONS WHY YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN RENDERED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY DURING THE PERIOD FROM FEBRUARY 12. AS A RESULT OF YOUR STATEMENTS YOU WERE PLACED ON DUTY AND PAID CURRENTLY AS AN ENLISTED MAN FROM JANUARY 9 TO MARCH 31. YOU WERE RELEASED FROM SUCH CONTROL. WHILE THE REPORT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY DOES NOT SHOW WHY YOU WERE PAID RETROACTIVELY TO JANUARY 9 AFTER REPORTING FEBRUARY 12. IT IS ASSUMED THAT IN VIEW OF THE STATEMENTS MADE BY YOU. YOU THEN WERE CONSIDERED AS BEING MILITARY PERSONNEL IN A MISSING IN ACTION STATUS DURING THAT PERIOD.

B-121561, NOV. 20, 1956

TO MR. DIONISIO P. GUEVARRA:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 21, 1956, RELATIVE TO YOUR CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES FROM FEBRUARY 12, 1945, TO AUGUST 1, 1945, ALLEGEDLY AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY IN THE PHILIPPINES.

YOUR LETTER PRESENTS NO FACTS NOT HERETOFORE FULLY CONSIDERED IN OUR DECISION OF NOVEMBER 3, 1954, B-121561, TO YOU, WHICH SET FORTH THE REASONS WHY YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN RENDERED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY DURING THE PERIOD FROM FEBRUARY 12, 1945, TO AUGUST 1, 1945, AND IT WOULD BE NEEDLESS REPETITION TO RESTATE THE CASE IN DETAIL HERE.

THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ADVISES US THAT YOU REPORTED TO MILITARY CONTROL HEADQUARTERS IN THE PHILIPPINES ON FEBRUARY 12, 1945, ALLEGING SERVICE WITH THE PHILIPPINE SCOUTS DURING THE WAR PERIOD. AS A RESULT OF YOUR STATEMENTS YOU WERE PLACED ON DUTY AND PAID CURRENTLY AS AN ENLISTED MAN FROM JANUARY 9 TO MARCH 31, 1945, PENDING SEARCH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS CONCERNING YOUR ALLEGED PRIOR MILITARY SERVICE. A SEARCH OF THE RECORDS FAILED TO SHOW ANY PRIOR MILITARY SERVICE BY YOU AND ACCORDINGLY, YOU WERE RELEASED FROM SUCH CONTROL. WHILE THE REPORT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY DOES NOT SHOW WHY YOU WERE PAID RETROACTIVELY TO JANUARY 9 AFTER REPORTING FEBRUARY 12, 1945, TO MILITARY CONTROL, IT IS ASSUMED THAT IN VIEW OF THE STATEMENTS MADE BY YOU, YOU THEN WERE CONSIDERED AS BEING MILITARY PERSONNEL IN A MISSING IN ACTION STATUS DURING THAT PERIOD.

WHEN THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE FACTS ALLEGED BY A CLAIMANT AND THE FACTS ADMINISTRATIVELY REPORTED, IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE CLAIMANT TO ESTABLISH BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT HIS CLAIM IS DUE AND THAT OFFICIAL RECORDS DO NOT CORRECTLY REPRESENT THE FACTS. THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY YOU DOES NOT ADEQUATELY ACCOMPLISH THAT PURPOSE.

ACCORDINGLY, BASED UPON THE PRESENT RECORD, IT MUST BE CONCLUDED THAT OUR SETTLEMENT IS CORRECT AND UPON REVIEW MUST BE AND IS SUSTAINED.