B-165784, JAN. 8, 1969
Highlights
496.76 IN EACH CASE THE OVERPAYMENT RESULTED FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR IN PLACING THE EMPLOYEE IN THE WRONG SALARY STEP OF HIS GS GRADE WHEN HE WAS PROMOTED AND TRANSFERRED TO A GS POSITION FROM A WAGE BOARD POSITION. EACH OF THE PROMOTIONS AND TRANSFERS WAS EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 16. AT WHICH TIME THE INITIAL GS RATE OF EACH SUCH EMPLOYEE WAS FIXED AS THOUGH THE COMPENSATION RATES PRESCRIBED BY SCHEDULE II AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 602 OF PUBLIC LAW 87-793 WAS IN EFFECT. THEREAFTER EACH INITIAL RATE WAS ADJUSTED TO REFLECT THE INCREASES PROVIDED BY PUBLIC LAW 88-426. AT THE TIME OF THE PROMOTION AND TRANSFER OF EACH OF THE EMPLOYEES THE COMPENSATION SCHEDULE PRESCRIBED BY SECTION 102 OF PUBLIC LAW 88-426 WAS IN EFFECT AND EACH OF THE EMPLOYEES INITIALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN PLACED AT ONE STEP BELOW THAT IN WHICH HE WAS PLACED UPON HIS PROMOTION AND TRANSFER.
B-165784, JAN. 8, 1969
TO MR. MCKEE:
WE REFER TO LETTER OF DECEMBER 9, 1968, WITH ENCLOSURES, FROM YOUR DIRECTOR OF MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS REQUESTING THAT UNDER THE AUTHORITY CONFERRED UPON THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL BY PUBLIC LAW 90-616 APPROVED OCTOBER 21, 1968, WE WAIVE THE CLAIM OF THE GOVERNMENT AGAINST EACH OF THE FOLLOWING NAMED EMPLOYEES OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WHO RECEIVED ERRONEOUS PAYMENTS OF PAY IN THE AMOUNT SET OPPOSITE HIS NAME:
FRANCIS K. COBLE $ 920.80
MAURICE B. DUGAN 930.38
DONALD E. EASTES 983.50
PETER LELECK, JR. 1,032.18
RICHARD E. TREALOR 629.90
$4,496.76
IN EACH CASE THE OVERPAYMENT RESULTED FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR IN PLACING THE EMPLOYEE IN THE WRONG SALARY STEP OF HIS GS GRADE WHEN HE WAS PROMOTED AND TRANSFERRED TO A GS POSITION FROM A WAGE BOARD POSITION. EACH OF THE PROMOTIONS AND TRANSFERS WAS EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 16, 1964, AT WHICH TIME THE INITIAL GS RATE OF EACH SUCH EMPLOYEE WAS FIXED AS THOUGH THE COMPENSATION RATES PRESCRIBED BY SCHEDULE II AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 602 OF PUBLIC LAW 87-793 WAS IN EFFECT. THEREAFTER EACH INITIAL RATE WAS ADJUSTED TO REFLECT THE INCREASES PROVIDED BY PUBLIC LAW 88-426. IN FACT, AT THE TIME OF THE PROMOTION AND TRANSFER OF EACH OF THE EMPLOYEES THE COMPENSATION SCHEDULE PRESCRIBED BY SECTION 102 OF PUBLIC LAW 88-426 WAS IN EFFECT AND EACH OF THE EMPLOYEES INITIALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN PLACED AT ONE STEP BELOW THAT IN WHICH HE WAS PLACED UPON HIS PROMOTION AND TRANSFER.
YOUR DIRECTOR'S LETTER POINTS OUT THAT THERE IS NO INDICATION OF "MISREPRESENTATION, FRAUD OR ANY OTHER BAD FAITH ON THE PART OF THE EMPLOYEES WHO RECEIVED THE PAYMENTS OR ANY OTHER PERSON.' ALSO, WE HAVE BEEN INFORMALLY ADVISED BY OFFICIALS IN YOUR ADMINISTRATION THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF FAULT ON THE PART OF ANY EMPLOYEE INVOLVED OR ANY OTHER PERSON INTERESTED IN OBTAINING A WAIVER OF THE CLAIM. IN VIEW THEREOF IT IS OUR CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE CLAIMS AGAINST EACH OF THE EMPLOYEES INVOLVED APPROPRIATELY MAY BE AND HEREBY ARE WAIVED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF PUBLIC LAW 90-616. IT IS REQUESTED THAT YOU ADVISE EACH OF THE EMPLOYEES CONCERNED OF THIS ACTION.
IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT ANY OF THE EMPLOYEES INVOLVED HAVE REPAID ANY PORTION OF THE INDEBTEDNESS THAT HAS BEEN WAIVED UNDER THE ACT. HOWEVER, IN THE EVENT THAT ANY EMPLOYEE HAS LIQUIDATED ANY PORTION OF THE INDEBTEDNESS HE SHOULD BE ADVISED BY YOUR ADMINISTRATION THAT HE HAS YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE WAIVER WITHIN WHICH TO FILE A CLAIM WITH YOUR AGENCY FOR REFUND OF AMOUNTS PAID IN LIQUIDATION OF ALL OR PART OF THE INDEBTEDNESS WHICH HAS BEEN WAIVED.