B-152128, AUG. 19, 1963
Highlights
WE DENIED YOUR CLAIM BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE REPORTED THAT THE OVERTIME SERVICE FOR WHICH COMPENSATION IS SOUGHT WAS NOT ORDERED OR APPROVED AS REQUIRED BY THE LAW CODIFIED AT 5 U.S.C. 911 AND IMPLEMENTING AIR FORCE REGULATIONS. YOU MAINTAIN THAT THE SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT HOUSE IN THE CRAFTS SHOP WHERE YOU WORKED WERE YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AND IT WAS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU BE PRESENT DURING THE HOURS THE SHOP WAS OPEN IN ORDER TO AVOID PILFERAGE OF SUCH SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT. WITH REGARD TO WHETHER THE OVERTIME WAS OFFICIALLY ORDERED OR APPROVED THE FILE OF RECORD SHOWS THE FOLLOWING: (1) ON NOVEMBER 20. IT IS APPARENT THAT IN YOUR CASE THE DUTY TO GIVE FINAL APPROVAL VESTED WITH THE COMPTROLLER.
B-152128, AUG. 19, 1963
TO MR. JAMES LEE OFFUTT:
BY LETTERS DATED JULY 8 AND 15, 1963, YOU REQUESTED RECONSIDERATION OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF FEBRUARY 19, 1963, WHEREIN WE DENIED YOUR CLAIM FOR OVERTIME COMPENSATION ALLEGEDLY DUE INCIDENT TO YOUR EMPLOYMENT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE DURING THE PERIOD JUNE 27 TO SEPTEMBER 6, 1959.
WE DENIED YOUR CLAIM BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE REPORTED THAT THE OVERTIME SERVICE FOR WHICH COMPENSATION IS SOUGHT WAS NOT ORDERED OR APPROVED AS REQUIRED BY THE LAW CODIFIED AT 5 U.S.C. 911 AND IMPLEMENTING AIR FORCE REGULATIONS.
YOU MAINTAIN THAT THE SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT HOUSE IN THE CRAFTS SHOP WHERE YOU WORKED WERE YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AND IT WAS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU BE PRESENT DURING THE HOURS THE SHOP WAS OPEN IN ORDER TO AVOID PILFERAGE OF SUCH SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT. YOU ALSO MAINTAIN THAT YOUR SUPERVISOR ORDERED THE OVERTIME INVOLVED AND THE MAJOR IN CHARGE APPROVED SUCH OVERTIME.
WITH REGARD TO WHETHER THE OVERTIME WAS OFFICIALLY ORDERED OR APPROVED THE FILE OF RECORD SHOWS THE FOLLOWING:
(1) ON NOVEMBER 20, 1959, CARMINE DELUCIA, MANUAL ARTS AND CRAFTS DIRECTOR, REQUESTED RETROACTIVE APPROVAL OF PAY FOR OVERTIME WORK TOTALING 220 HOURS PERFORMED BY YOU BETWEEN JUNE 27, AND SEPTEMBER 7, 1959.
(2) ON NOVEMBER 24, 1959, J. C. FAURER ACTING FOR MAJOR H. M. ARNOLD, PERSONNEL SERVICE OFFICER, RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF SUCH OVERTIME.
(3) ON DECEMBER 1, 1959, THE COMPTROLLER, LIEUTENANT COLONEL RICHARD D. KIICK, DISAPPROVED THE OVERTIME PAY REQUEST ON THE BASIS OF AFM 40-1, CHAP. AF P9, SECTION 2, PARAGRAPH 7.
PERTINENT AIR FORCE REGULATIONS, NOW FOUND AT AFM 40-1, AF H. 2.4, PLACES FINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ESTABLISHING TOURS OF DUTY AND OVERTIME APPROVAL WITH THE COMMANDING GENERAL OF MAJOR AIR COMMANDS. THIS REGULATION PROVIDES FOR APPROPRIATE DELEGATION. IT IS APPARENT THAT IN YOUR CASE THE DUTY TO GIVE FINAL APPROVAL VESTED WITH THE COMPTROLLER, LIEUTENANT COLONEL KIICK. IT FOLLOWS THAT IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THE OVERTIME COMPENSATION SOUGHT IT WAS NECESSARY FOR THAT OFFICIAL TO GRANT HIS APPROVAL. THIS HE FAILED TO DO.
CONSEQUENTLY, THE RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVAL OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION BY YOUR SUPERVISOR AND THE PERSONNEL OFFICE WAS NOT AN ORDER OR APPROVAL AS REQUIRED BY THE APPLICABLE LAW AND REGULATION AND OUR SETTLEMENT OF FEBRUARY 19, 1963, DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM IS SUSTAINED.