B-147254, SEP. 28, 1961

B-147254: Sep 28, 1961

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

YOU WERE INFORMED THAT YOU HAD SEEDED 2.3 ACRES OF LAND IN EXCESS OF YOUR PERMITTED ALLOTMENT. ASIDE FROM THE STATED EXCESS ACREAGE THIS NOTICE OF ACREAGE ADVISED YOU OF YOUR RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 15 DAYS IF FOR ANY REASON YOU BELIEVED THAT THE ACREAGE DETERMINATION WAS INCORRECT. IN THIS REGARD THE LAW CODIFIED AT 7 U.S.C. 1363 PROVIDES: "ANY FARMER WHO IS DISSATISFIED WITH HIS FARM MARKETING QUOTA MAY. HAVE SUCH QUOTA REVIEWED BY A LOCAL REVIEW COMMITTEE COMPOSED OF THREE FARMERS FROM THE SAME OR NEARBY COUNTIES APPOINTED BY THE SECRETARY. UNLESS APPLICATION FOR REVIEW IS MADE WITHIN SUCH PERIOD. WE ARE NOT UNMINDFUL OF YOUR CONTENTION THAT WHEN YOUR FIELD WAS MEASURED PART OF THE ACREAGE WAS SEEDED WITH BARLEY AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE DURUM MEASUREMENT.

B-147254, SEP. 28, 1961

TO MR. ROBERT E. STENSRUD:

BY LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 8, 1961, YOU REQUESTED REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 1, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR THE VALUE OF 2.3 ACRES OF DURUM WHEAT WHICH YOU DESTROYED IN 1960 UPON RECEIPT OF NOTICE THAT YOU PLANTED ACREAGE IN EXCESS OF YOUR ALLOTMENT.

THE FACTS OF RECORD SHOW THAT BY NOTICE OF ACREAGE DATED JULY 6, 1960, YOU WERE INFORMED THAT YOU HAD SEEDED 2.3 ACRES OF LAND IN EXCESS OF YOUR PERMITTED ALLOTMENT. ASIDE FROM THE STATED EXCESS ACREAGE THIS NOTICE OF ACREAGE ADVISED YOU OF YOUR RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 15 DAYS IF FOR ANY REASON YOU BELIEVED THAT THE ACREAGE DETERMINATION WAS INCORRECT. IN THIS REGARD THE LAW CODIFIED AT 7 U.S.C. 1363 PROVIDES:

"ANY FARMER WHO IS DISSATISFIED WITH HIS FARM MARKETING QUOTA MAY, WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS AFTER MAILING TO HIM OF NOTICE AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 1362 OF THIS TITLE, HAVE SUCH QUOTA REVIEWED BY A LOCAL REVIEW COMMITTEE COMPOSED OF THREE FARMERS FROM THE SAME OR NEARBY COUNTIES APPOINTED BY THE SECRETARY. SUCH COMMITTEE SHALL NOT INCLUDE ANY MEMBER OF THE LOCAL COMMITTEE WHICH DETERMINED THE FARM ACREAGE ALLOTMENT, THE NORMAL YIELD, OR THE FARM MARKETING QUOTA FOR SUCH FARM. UNLESS APPLICATION FOR REVIEW IS MADE WITHIN SUCH PERIOD, THE ORIGINAL DETERMINATION OF THE FARM MARKETING QUOTA SHALL BE FINAL.'

WE ARE NOT UNMINDFUL OF YOUR CONTENTION THAT WHEN YOUR FIELD WAS MEASURED PART OF THE ACREAGE WAS SEEDED WITH BARLEY AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE DURUM MEASUREMENT. SIMILARLY, WE TAKE COGNIZANCE OF YOUR STATEMENT THAT IN JULY OF 1960 YOU TALKED TO THE A.S.C. MANAGER ABOUT THE MEASUREMENT, AND THAT WHILE A MAN WAS SENT OUT TO RE MEASURE THE FIELD HE DID NOT, SO FAR AS YOU KNOW, MAKE THE RE MEASUREMENT. HOWEVER, THE DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR OF STATE AND COUNTY OPERATIONS OF THE AGRICULTURAL STABILIZATION AND CONSERVATION SERVICE IN HIS REPORT TO OUR OFFICE OF AUGUST 14, 1961, ADVISED THAT "THERE IS NO RECORD THAT (THE) CLAIMANT DISAGREED WITH (THE) ORIGINAL MEASUREMENT.'

IT IS A RULE OF LONG STANDING OF THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT THAT, IN THE ABSENCE OF SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION OF THE CORRECTNESS OF FACTS AS ADMINISTRATIVELY REPORTED, THOSE FACTS WILL BE ACCEPTED AS CORRECT WHERE THEY CONFLICT WITH STATEMENTS OF FACT SUBMITTED BY A CLAIMANT.

ACCORDINGLY OUR SETTLEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1961, IS, ON THE PRESENT RECORD, SUSTAINED AND YOUR CLAIM IS DENIED.