Skip to Highlights
Highlights

RETIRED: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED MARCH 20. APPARENTLY THE AMOUNT OF THE OVERPAYMENT MADE TO YOU WAS DEDUCTED FROM RETIRED PAY OTHERWISE DUE YOU IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT PROCEDURE AND THIS OFFICE MAY NOT GIVE YOUR CLAIM FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION.

View Decision

B-155995, APR. 16, 1965

TO FIRST LIEUTENANT MELECIO P. ALBERTO, AUS, RETIRED:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED MARCH 20, 1965, IN RESPONSE TO OUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 10, 1965, B-155995, CONCERNING YOUR INDEBTEDNESS TO THE UNITED STATES ON ACCOUNT OF OVERPAYMENTS MADE TO YOU BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY.

WE EXPLAINED TO YOU IN DETAIL HOW YOUR INDEBTEDNESS AROSE AND POINTED OUT THAT OUR DECISION OF OCTOBER 23, 1963, B-151263, ON WHICH YOU RELY, HAS NO BEARING ON YOUR CASE SINCE THAT DECISION APPLIES ONLY TO CLAIMS AGAINST PERSONS WHO RECEIVED "DUAL COMPENSATION," WHEREAS YOUR INDEBTEDNESS REPRESENTED A SIMPLE ERRONEOUS PAYMENT, NOT DUAL COMPENSATION. NOTHING CONTAINED IN YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 20, 1965, WARRANTS ANY MODIFICATION OF OUR DECISION OF FEBRUARY 10, 1965, TO YOU.

THE ACT OF JULY 15, 1954, PUB.L. 497, 68 STAT. 482 (5 U.S.C. 46D) AUTHORIZES THE COLLECTION OF ANY ERRONEOUS PAYMENT MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT CONCERNED IN MONTHLY INSTALLMENTS. CHAPTER 10 OF ARMY REGULATIONS 37-104 ISSUED PURSUANT TO THAT ACT (5 U.S.C. 46E) SETS FORTH THE POLICY AND PROCEDURE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WITH RESPECT TO COLLECTION OF ERRONEOUS PAYMENTS MADE BY THAT DEPARTMENT. APPARENTLY THE AMOUNT OF THE OVERPAYMENT MADE TO YOU WAS DEDUCTED FROM RETIRED PAY OTHERWISE DUE YOU IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT PROCEDURE AND THIS OFFICE MAY NOT GIVE YOUR CLAIM FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION.

GAO Contacts