David W. Snearly

B-271133 Apr 30, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights It is not unreasonable for him to have thought he had not been separated from the Navy and was therefore entitled to the additional payment of pay and allowances. Was scheduled to be discharged from the Navy in June 1994. Snearly was then assigned was scheduled to sail from Charleston for the Mediterranean on or about June 5. Snearly was authorized to take terminal leave beginning May 30 pending his discharge rather than sail with his ship and shortly thereafter be flown back to the United States for discharge. Snearly's personnel and pay records were retained on board the ship when it sailed. Snearly states that he had been told that his DD form 214 (Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active Duty) would be forwarded to him by the date he was due to be discharged. View Decision Matter of: David W. Snearly File: B-271133 Date: April 30, 1996 Former Navy enlisted member may be granted waiver of his debt for erroneous payment of pay and allowances made to him after the effective date of his discharge where he had been placed on terminal leave prior to discharge, and at the time of the erroneous payment, he had not received discharge papers or final statement of pay because his ship had sailed with his personnel records on board and the ship's personnel had overlooked preparing the discharge papers. In the circumstances, it is not unreasonable for him to have thought he had not been separated from the Navy and was therefore entitled to the additional payment of pay and allowances. DECISION This responds to an appeal of a Claims Group settlement [1] that partially waived the collection of erroneous payments of pay and allowances made to David W. Snearly after his separation from the Navy. We conclude that Mr. Snearly's request for a waiver of the remainder of his debt may be granted. BACKGROUND Mr. Snearly, an electronics technician (E-5), was scheduled to be discharged from the Navy in June 1994, after 5 years and 8 months of active duty. Because the ship to which Mr. Snearly was then assigned was scheduled to sail from Charleston for the Mediterranean on or about June 5, 1994, Mr. Snearly was authorized to take terminal leave beginning May 30 pending his discharge rather than sail with his ship and shortly thereafter be flown back to the United States for discharge. However, Mr. Snearly's personnel and pay records were retained on board the ship when it sailed. Mr. Snearly states that he had been told that his DD form 214 (Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active Duty) would be forwarded to him by the date he was due to be discharged, June 17, but he did not receive it by that date nor did he receive the out-processing (including a statement of final pay and allowances) usually provided a member being discharged, since he was not assigned to a shore station and his records were still on shipboard. After he made inquiry, and after his father inquired subsequently on his behalf, Naval officers at Charleston contacted the ship and were advised that the matter had been overlooked, but the discharge papers would be prepared and sent to him. Apparently this was in early July, but because the papers were sent by surface mail, Mr. Snearly did not receive them until July 25. In the meantime, although he was scheduled to be discharged on June 17, the Navy made payments of pay and allowances to his bank account on July 1 and 15, apparently because the papers had not been prepared and forwarded from his ship in time to prevent the payments. The Navy later determined that as of the effective date of Mr. Snearly's discharge on June 17, he was entitled to receive a final separation payment of $634.23 which represented pay and allowances for 2 days, 5 days of lump-sum leave, and a clothing maintenance allowance. The payment the Navy made to his account on July 1 was in the amount of $858.49. As a result of this payment, Mr. Snearly was overpaid $224.26 (i.e., $858.49 minus the $634.23 he was due on separation). The payment made to his account on July 15, in the amount of $654.15, was the usual mid-month payment of pay and allowances he had been receiving on active duty. The Navy determined that the entire July 15 payment was erroneous because it was for a period after the effective date of Mr. Snearly's discharge, June 17. Thus, the total amount of the overpayments to Mr. Snearly was $878.41. Several months later, the Navy discovered the overpayments and sought refund from Mr. Snearly. He initially responded that he did not think he had been overpaid, and he asked for documentation explaining the payments he had received, including leave and earnings statements for the last 3 months of his active duty, which he indicated he had not received.