B-190332 L/M, MAR 19, 1980
Highlights
WE HAVE CORRESPONDED WITH YOUR OFFICE AND WITH MR. IN ADDITION THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF TELEPHONE CALLS WITH VARIOUS INDIVIDUALS IN THIS OFFICE WITH MR. COPIES OF ALL OF THE CORRESPONDENCE AND OTHER DOCUMENTS CONTAINED IN HIS FILE WERE FORWARDED TO YOUR OFFICE BY LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 11. WE HAVE NOTHING TO ADD TO WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SAID. PRAXEL HAS NOT PRESENTED A CASE WHICH WILL JUSTIFY ANY FURTHER PAYMENT TO HIM. WE REGRET THAT WE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO COMMUNICATE THIS CONCLUSION TO MR. OR TO DEMONSTRATE TO HIM THAT THERE IS NOTHING FURTHER WE CAN DO WITH RESPECT TO HIS CLAIM. THAT WE HAVE FULLY CONSIDERED HIS CASE AND HAVE CONCLUDED THAT HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO AN ADDITIONAL PAYMENT.
B-190332 L/M, MAR 19, 1980
PRECIS-UNAVAILABLE
THOMAS S. FOLEY, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:
WE REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 7, 1980, WITH ENCLOSURE, REGARDING THE TRAVEL CLAIM OF MR. EDWARD F. PRAXEL. MR. PRAXEL HAS PRESENTED NOTHING NEW REGARDING HIS CLAIM FOR TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES WHILE A CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY.
WE HAVE CORRESPONDED WITH YOUR OFFICE AND WITH MR. PRAXEL ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS REGARDING HIS CLAIM. IN ADDITION THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF TELEPHONE CALLS WITH VARIOUS INDIVIDUALS IN THIS OFFICE WITH MR. PRAXEL IN AN ATTEMPT TO CLARIFY FOR HIM THE BASIS OF OUR DECISION OF APRIL 26, 1978, WHICH DENIED HIS CLAIM.
BASED UPON THE RECORD BEFORE US WE KNOW OF NOTHING FURTHER THAT CAN BE DONE FOR MR. PRAXEL UNDER EXISTING LAW. WE INFORMED MR. PRAXEL BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 13, 1979, THAT WE COULD NOT BE OF FURTHER ASSISTANCE. COPIES OF ALL OF THE CORRESPONDENCE AND OTHER DOCUMENTS CONTAINED IN HIS FILE WERE FORWARDED TO YOUR OFFICE BY LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 11, 1979. WE HAVE NOTHING TO ADD TO WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SAID. MR. PRAXEL HAS NOT PRESENTED A CASE WHICH WILL JUSTIFY ANY FURTHER PAYMENT TO HIM.
WE REGRET THAT WE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO COMMUNICATE THIS CONCLUSION TO MR. PRAXEL, OR TO DEMONSTRATE TO HIM THAT THERE IS NOTHING FURTHER WE CAN DO WITH RESPECT TO HIS CLAIM. THE FACT REMAINS, HOWEVER, THAT WE HAVE FULLY CONSIDERED HIS CASE AND HAVE CONCLUDED THAT HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO AN ADDITIONAL PAYMENT.
WE TRUST THIS SERVES THE PURPOSE OF YOUR INQUIRY.