B-149090, NOV. 7, 1962
Highlights
RETIRED: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 3. WHICH WAS AUTHORIZED IN OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 28. WAS RECEIVED IN THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE ON APRIL 27. WAS BARRED FROM CONSIDERATION FOR ANY PERIOD PRIOR TO APRIL 27. AS YOU WERE ADVISED IN OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 28. THE CLAIM WHICH YOU SENT TO THE NAVY FINANCE CENTER SHOULD HAVE BEEN FORWARDED BY THAT OFFICE TO THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE. YOU ARE ADVISED THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS ARE AUTHORIZED TO FORWARD TO OUR OFFICE CLAIMS WHICH THEY CONSIDER DOUBTFUL. THERE IS NO PROVISION OF LAW OR ANY CUSTOM OF WHICH WE ARE AWARE REQUIRING THAT EVERY CLAIM WHICH HAS NOT RECEIVED FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BE FORWARDED TO US WITHOUT ANY FURTHER ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CLAIMANT.
B-149090, NOV. 7, 1962
TO LIEUTENANT COMMANDER ELMO H. WILLIAMS, USN, RETIRED:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 3, 1962, ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF THE PAYMENT COVERING AN ADJUSTMENT IN YOUR RETIRED PAY FOR THE PERIOD APRIL 27, 1951, TO MARCH 31, 1955, WHICH WAS AUTHORIZED IN OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 28, 1962, B-149090, AND AGAIN PROTESTING APPLICATION OF THE ACT OF OCTOBER 9, 1940, CH. 788, 54 STAT. 1061, IN YOUR CASE.
YOUR CLAIM FOR ADJUSTMENT IN RETIRED PAY BASED ON THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 15 OF THE PAY READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1942, APPROVED JUNE 16, 1942, CH. 413, 56 STAT. 368, WAS RECEIVED IN THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE ON APRIL 27, 1961, AND WAS BARRED FROM CONSIDERATION FOR ANY PERIOD PRIOR TO APRIL 27, 1951, BY THE EXPRESS PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF OCTOBER 9, 1940, CITED ABOVE. AS YOU WERE ADVISED IN OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 28, 1962, THE FACT THAT YOU FILED AN EARLIER CLAIM FOR THE SAME ADJUSTMENT IN RETIRED PAY WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY DOES NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE 1940 ACT SINCE THAT ACT PROVIDES THAT SUCH CLAIMS MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE WITHIN 10 YEARS AFTER DATE OF ACCRUAL.
WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR STATEMENT THAT, THROUGH CUSTOM, THE CLAIM WHICH YOU SENT TO THE NAVY FINANCE CENTER SHOULD HAVE BEEN FORWARDED BY THAT OFFICE TO THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, YOU ARE ADVISED THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS ARE AUTHORIZED TO FORWARD TO OUR OFFICE CLAIMS WHICH THEY CONSIDER DOUBTFUL, BUT THERE IS NO PROVISION OF LAW OR ANY CUSTOM OF WHICH WE ARE AWARE REQUIRING THAT EVERY CLAIM WHICH HAS NOT RECEIVED FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BE FORWARDED TO US WITHOUT ANY FURTHER ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CLAIMANT.
THE ACT OF OCTOBER 9, 1940, IS NOT A MERE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS AND THE FILING OF A CLAIM IN THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD OF TIME IS A CONDITION PRECEDENT TO THE RIGHT TO HAVE SUCH CLAIMS CONSIDERED BY OUR OFFICE. COMPARE BARTLESVILLE ZINC COMPANY V. MELLON, 56 F.2D 154, AND CARPENTER V. UNITED STATES, 56 F.2D 828. SEE ALSO THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF CLAIMS IN THE CASE HAISLIP V. UNITED STATES, CT.CL. NO. 442-59, DATED JANUARY 18, 1961, AND CASES CITED THEREIN.
WE TRUST YOU WILL UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE PROHIBITED BY LAW FROM CONSIDERING YOUR CLAIM FOR ADJUSTMENT IN RETIRED PAY FOR ANY PERIOD PRIOR TO APRIL 27, 1951, AND THAT THERE IS NO FURTHER ACTION WE MAY TAKE IN THE MATTER.