B-150338, JUL. 12, 1966
Highlights
NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 28. WAS APPLICABLE TO BOTH THE NAVAL STATION AND THE NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER AND WAS THE INITIAL RECOGNITION OF THE OVERTIME SITUATION BY OFFICERS WHO MIGHT PROPERLY AUTHORIZE OR APPROVE PAYMENT OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION. IT IS NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR THAT HE WAS EMPOWERED TO AUTHORIZE OR APPROVE ALLOWANCE OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION AND THEREBY OBLIGATE THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY. SINCE HE WAS THE SENIOR CIVILIAN IN CHARGE OF THE NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER GUARD FORCE DURING THE PERIOD IN QUESTION. OUR OFFICE WILL INTERPOSE NO OBJECTION TO OTHERWISE PROPER OVERTIME PAYMENTS FOR THE PERIOD JULY 9. WE SHOULD POINT OUT THAT CLAIMS FOR THE AMOUNTS HERE INVOLVED WERE FIRST RECEIVED IN THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE ON JULY 9.
B-150338, JUL. 12, 1966
TO COMMANDING OFFICER, NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 28, 1966, REFERENCE 10A24:AP, CONCERNING THE PAYMENTS TO PETER ADAMS ET AL., NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, NORFOLK, VIRGINIA 23512, FOR OVERTIME SERVICES RENDERED DURING THE PERIOD JULY 7, 1954 TO JULY 28, 1955.
IN OUR LETTERS TO YOU OF OCTOBER 4, 1965 AND MAY 23, 1966, WE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE WRITTEN DIRECTIVE OF JULY 28, 1955, WAS APPLICABLE TO BOTH THE NAVAL STATION AND THE NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER AND WAS THE INITIAL RECOGNITION OF THE OVERTIME SITUATION BY OFFICERS WHO MIGHT PROPERLY AUTHORIZE OR APPROVE PAYMENT OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION. SEE BILELLO ET AL. V. UNITED STATES, CT.CL. NO. 198-63, DECIDED MARCH 18, 1966, AND THE CASES CITED THEREIN.
WHILE WE ACCEPT THE STATEMENT OF MR. J. C. BARNES AS BEING FACTUALLY CORRECT, IT IS NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR THAT HE WAS EMPOWERED TO AUTHORIZE OR APPROVE ALLOWANCE OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION AND THEREBY OBLIGATE THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY. ON THE OTHER HAND, SINCE HE WAS THE SENIOR CIVILIAN IN CHARGE OF THE NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER GUARD FORCE DURING THE PERIOD IN QUESTION, OUR OFFICE WILL INTERPOSE NO OBJECTION TO OTHERWISE PROPER OVERTIME PAYMENTS FOR THE PERIOD JULY 9, 1954 TO JULY 28, 1955, TO MR. ADAMS.
WE SHOULD POINT OUT THAT CLAIMS FOR THE AMOUNTS HERE INVOLVED WERE FIRST RECEIVED IN THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE ON JULY 9, 1964, AND, THEREFORE, ARE SUBJECT TO THE LIMITATION IN 31 U.S.C. 71A.