B-154696, DEC. 10, 1964

B-154696: Dec 10, 1964

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Shirley Jones
(202) 512-8156
jonessa@gao.gov

 

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

JOSEPH LEIB: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 25. WE HAD EXAMINED THE RECORDS OF THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION WHICH WERE AVAILABLE TO US AND THAT IN OUR OPINION THE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OF THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION WAS SUPPORTED BY SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO PRECLUDE A CONCLUSION THAT THE DECISION WAS IN ERROR. POINTING OUT THAT WE HAD REFERENCE ONLY TO CONCLUSIONS BY US AND THAT IT WAS NOT INTENDED TO IMPLY THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS COULD NOT TAKE ANY ACTION WHICH HE MIGHT DEEM APPROPRIATE IN YOUR CASE. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES AND SINCE YOUR CLAIM FOR DISABILITY COMPENSATION IS A MATTER ENTIRELY WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION. YOU SAY THAT SINCE WE HAVE NO JURISDICTION IN THIS CASE WE SHOULD NOT HAVE EXPRESSED ANY OPINION AS TO THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION IN YOUR CASE.

B-154696, DEC. 10, 1964

TO MR. JOSEPH LEIB:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 25, 1964, AND TO YOUR CONFERENCE OF OCTOBER 26, 1964, WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF OUR OFFICE, REGARDING OUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 22, 1964, TO YOU IN WHICH WE EXPLAINED THE BASIS FOR CERTAIN COMMENTS CONTAINED IN A REPORT DATED AUGUST 31, 1964, TO THE HONORABLE JOHN LESINSKI, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, ON YOUR CLAIM FOR DISABILITY COMPENSATION FROM THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION.

IN THE REPORT OF AUGUST 31, 1964, TO REPRESENTATIVE LESINSKI, WE ADVISED HIM IN SUBSTANCE THAT WHILE OUR OFFICE HAD NO JURISDICTION IN THE MATTER, WE HAD EXAMINED THE RECORDS OF THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION WHICH WERE AVAILABLE TO US AND THAT IN OUR OPINION THE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OF THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION WAS SUPPORTED BY SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO PRECLUDE A CONCLUSION THAT THE DECISION WAS IN ERROR.

YOU OBJECTED TO THAT EXPRESSION OF OUR VIEWS AND IN OUR LETTER TO YOU DATED OCTOBER 22, 1964, WE EXPLAINED THE BASIS FOR SUCH VIEWS, POINTING OUT THAT WE HAD REFERENCE ONLY TO CONCLUSIONS BY US AND THAT IT WAS NOT INTENDED TO IMPLY THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS COULD NOT TAKE ANY ACTION WHICH HE MIGHT DEEM APPROPRIATE IN YOUR CASE. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES AND SINCE YOUR CLAIM FOR DISABILITY COMPENSATION IS A MATTER ENTIRELY WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION, WE SUGGESTED THAT SUCH FURTHER ACTION AS YOU MAY CARE TO TAKE IN THE MATTER SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS.

IN YOUR PRESENT LETTER, AS IN YOUR EARLIER COMMUNICATION, YOU SAY THAT SINCE WE HAVE NO JURISDICTION IN THIS CASE WE SHOULD NOT HAVE EXPRESSED ANY OPINION AS TO THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION IN YOUR CASE. WHILE THE OPINION WE EXPRESSED WAS NOT FAVORABLE TO YOU, WE UNDERSTOOD REPRESENTATIVE LESINSKI'S REQUEST AS SPECIFICALLY ASKING FOR OUR VIEWS IN THE MATTER AND OUR REPORT WAS BASED UPON THAT UNDERSTANDING. WE TRUST YOU WILL UNDERSTAND THAT WE DID NOT CONSIDER IT OUTSIDE THE GENERAL SCOPE OF OUR DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES TO COMPLY WITH HIS REQUEST FOR OUR VIEWS ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION EVEN THOUGH THAT DECISION MAY BE FINAL AND CONCLUSIVE UNDER A SPECIFIC PROVISION IN THE STATUTE.

WE FIND NO PROPER BASIS FOR CHANGING OR WITHDRAWING OUR OPINION AS ..END

Jan 14, 2021

Jan 13, 2021

Looking for more? Browse all our products here