B-157466, SEP. 23, 1965

B-157466: Sep 23, 1965

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

PREVIOUS LETTERS FROM OUR OFFICE AND FROM THE SOLICITOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR HAVE FULLY EXPLAINED THE FOREGOING MATTERS AS RAISED IN LETTERS FROM YOU. THE LANGUAGE OF THAT REGULATION READING "HE MAY NOT RECEIVE MORE THAN ONE DURING THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME "APPARENTLY CAUSES YOU TO DOUBT WHETHER YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROCEEDS OF THE TWO CHECKS. WAS MANDATORY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 5 U.S.C. 61B. 24 COMP. SO FAR AS THE LUMP-SUM PAYMENT FOR ANNUAL LEAVE MADE TO YOU UPON SEPARATION IS CONCERNED WE HOLD THAT IT DOES NOT REPRESENT SALARY OR COMPENSATION FOR THE SAME PERIOD AS THE PAYMENT MADE TO YOU BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR. IN VIEW OF THAT CONCLUSION AND THE OPINION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TO THE EFFECT THAT BOTH PAYMENTS WERE PROPER THE QUESTION OF AN IMPROPER DUAL PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION NO LONGER IS INVOLVED.

B-157466, SEP. 23, 1965

TO MR. CHARLES H. BYFORD:

YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 9, 1965, ADDRESSED TO THE ACTING COMPTROLLER GENERAL CONTINUES TO QUESTION THE ISSUANCE TO YOU OF TWO CHECKS, ONE REPRESENTING COMPENSATION FOR AN INJURY RECEIVED WHILE EMPLOYED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE OTHER COVERING A LUMP-SUM PAYMENT FOR ANNUAL LEAVE UPON SEPARATION FROM THE SERVICE, EACH FOR A PERIOD COMMENCING DECEMBER 21, 1963.

PREVIOUS LETTERS FROM OUR OFFICE AND FROM THE SOLICITOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR HAVE FULLY EXPLAINED THE FOREGOING MATTERS AS RAISED IN LETTERS FROM YOU. WE SHALL NOT REPEAT HERE WHAT WE SAID IN THOSE LETTERS.

YOUR CURRENT LETTER REFERS TO AN ARMY CIVILIAN PERSONNEL REGULATION WHICH EXTENDS TO AN EMPLOYEE INJURED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS DUTIES THE BENEFITS OF THE FEDERAL EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION ACT, THE BENEFITS OF ANNUAL AND SICK LEAVE OR DISABILITY RETIREMENT. IT SPECIFICALLY PROVIDES THAT AN EMPLOYEE MUST ELECT, WHEN INJURED ON THE JOB, WHICH OF THE FOREGOING BENEFITS HE WISHES TO RECEIVE. THE LANGUAGE OF THAT REGULATION READING "HE MAY NOT RECEIVE MORE THAN ONE DURING THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME "APPARENTLY CAUSES YOU TO DOUBT WHETHER YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROCEEDS OF THE TWO CHECKS. YOU POINT OUT THAT YOU ELECTED TO TAKE THE BENEFITS OF THE FEDERAL EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION ACT AND RECEIVED A CHECK FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION COVERING A FOUR- WEEK PERIOD COMMENCING WITH DECEMBER 21, 1963; ALSO, THAT YOU PREVIOUSLY HAD RECEIVED A CHECK REPRESENTING A LUMP-SUM PAYMENT FOR THE ANNUAL LEAVE TO YOUR CREDIT ON THE DATE OF SEPARATION (DECEMBER 20, 1963), WHICH APPARENTLY COVERED THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME. SUCH PAYMENT, AS FULLY EXPLAINED IN OUR PREVIOUS LETTERS TO YOU, WAS MANDATORY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 5 U.S.C. 61B. 24 COMP. GEN. 511. THAT CHECK DID NOT REPRESENT COMPENSATION COVERING A PERIOD OF ANNUAL AND SICK LEAVE GRANTED TO COVER THE PERIOD OF YOUR INJURY. WE QUOTE FOR YOUR INFORMATION SPECIFIC LANGUAGE FROM 5 U.S.C. 61B READING AS FOLLOWS:

" * * * THE LUM-SUM PAYMENT HEREIN AUTHORIZED SHALL NOT BE REGARDED, EXCEPT FOR PURPOSES OF TAXATION, AS SALARY OR COMPENSATION AND SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO RETIREMENT DEDUCTIONS.'

THEREFORE, SO FAR AS THE LUMP-SUM PAYMENT FOR ANNUAL LEAVE MADE TO YOU UPON SEPARATION IS CONCERNED WE HOLD THAT IT DOES NOT REPRESENT SALARY OR COMPENSATION FOR THE SAME PERIOD AS THE PAYMENT MADE TO YOU BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR. IN VIEW OF THAT CONCLUSION AND THE OPINION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TO THE EFFECT THAT BOTH PAYMENTS WERE PROPER THE QUESTION OF AN IMPROPER DUAL PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION NO LONGER IS INVOLVED.

WE HOPE THE FOREGOING EXPLANATION AND OUR OFFICIAL DECISION CLARIFIES THIS MATTER FOR YOU AND WE SUGGEST THAT YOU CASH THE CHECKS PROMPTLY.