B-148533, AUG. 28, 1962
Highlights
INASMUCH AS NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS PRESENTED IN YOUR LETTER OF JULY 30. WHICH WAS NOT FULLY CONSIDERED BY OUR OFFICE AT THE TIME THE DECISION OF MAY 3. WAS RENDERED. THERE IS NO BASIS UPON WHICH THIS OFFICE MAY REVERSE THE CONCLUSIONS SET FORTH THEREIN. TO THE EFFECT THAT THE LAND IN QUESTION IS INUNDATED. YOU HAVE FAILED TO FURNISH EVIDENCE THAT SUCH FLOODING RESULTED FROM OTHER THAN NATURAL CAUSES. THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY HAS SUBMITTED DETAILED REPORTS OF ITS FINDINGS BASED ON SCIENTIFIC STUDIES OF THE AREA IN WHICH YOUR PROPERTY IS LOCATED. YOU HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY ADVISED OF THE RESULTS OF THOSE STUDIES WHICH SHOW THAT THE DAMAGES COMPLAINED OF WERE NOT CAUSED BY THE IMPOUNDMENT OF RESERVOIR WATERS BUT RESULTED FROM OVERABUNDANT RAINFALL.
B-148533, AUG. 28, 1962
TO MR. J. R. MCMILLAN:
YOUR LETTER OF JULY 30, 1962, REQUESTS FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION OF MAY 3, 1962, TO YOU. THAT DECISION SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR DIMINUTION IN THE VALUE OF YOUR PROPERTY ALLEGEDLY RESULTING FROM THE BACKING UP AND SEEPAGE OF WATER FROM THE JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM AT CHATTAHOOCHEE, FLORIDA.
INASMUCH AS NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS PRESENTED IN YOUR LETTER OF JULY 30, WHICH WAS NOT FULLY CONSIDERED BY OUR OFFICE AT THE TIME THE DECISION OF MAY 3, 1962, WAS RENDERED, THERE IS NO BASIS UPON WHICH THIS OFFICE MAY REVERSE THE CONCLUSIONS SET FORTH THEREIN.
ALTHOUGH YOU FEEL THAT THE STATEMENTS FURNISHED BY RESIDENTS OF THE AREA, TO THE EFFECT THAT THE LAND IN QUESTION IS INUNDATED, SUFFICIENTLY SUBSTANTIATE YOUR CLAIM, YOU HAVE FAILED TO FURNISH EVIDENCE THAT SUCH FLOODING RESULTED FROM OTHER THAN NATURAL CAUSES. MOREOVER, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY HAS SUBMITTED DETAILED REPORTS OF ITS FINDINGS BASED ON SCIENTIFIC STUDIES OF THE AREA IN WHICH YOUR PROPERTY IS LOCATED. YOU HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY ADVISED OF THE RESULTS OF THOSE STUDIES WHICH SHOW THAT THE DAMAGES COMPLAINED OF WERE NOT CAUSED BY THE IMPOUNDMENT OF RESERVOIR WATERS BUT RESULTED FROM OVERABUNDANT RAINFALL.
THE RULE IS WELL-ESTABLISHED AND LONG FOLLOWED BY GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING OFFICERS THAT IN THE EVENT OF A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FACTS AS STATED BY A CLAIMANT AND THOSE AS REPORTED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE CONCERNED, THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT MUST BE ACCEPTED AS CONTROLLING IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION OF THE CORRECTNESS OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. THE REASON FOR THIS RULE IS BECAUSE CASES SUBMITTED HERE FOR DETERMINATION ARE SETTLED ONLY ON THE BASIS OF THE WRITTEN RECORD AND ANY DETERMINATION REQUIRING THE TAKING OF SWORN TESTIMONY, THE CROSS EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES, ETC., MUST BE LEFT FOR RESOLUTION BY THE COURTS.
IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, OUR DECISION, B-148533 OF MAY 3, 1962, IS SUSTAINED.
WE CANNOT RETURN THE PAPERS REQUESTED BY YOU SINCE THEY CONSTITUTE PART OF THE RECORD WHICH MUST BE RETAINED IN THE FILES OF OUR OFFICE.