B-163149, JAN. 31, 1968
Highlights
SINCE CLAIMS INCIDENT FOR SERVICE IN WORLD WAR II WERE NOT RECEIVED IN GAO UNTIL MORE THAN 10 YEARS AFTER DATE OF ACCRUAL. CONSIDERATION IS PRECLUDED. CLAIMANT IS ADVISED OF BENEFITS UNDER CERTAIN RECENT LAWS (P.L. 89 50. 89-358) WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE. CRUZ: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 27. THE LAWS YOU CITE HAVE NO BEARING ON YOUR CASE. GOVERNMENT CHECKS IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY IN WHICH THERE IS NOT REASONABLE ASSURANCE THAT THE PAYEES WILL ACTUALLY RECEIVE SUCH CHECKS AND BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE THEM FOR FULL VALUE. YOU DO NOT ALLEGE THAT ANY CHECKS DRAWN TO YOUR ORDER HAVE BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE SPECIAL DEPOSIT ACCOUNT ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO THE ACT. WAS ENACTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING A RELATIVELY SMALL NUMBER OF OFFICERS WHO WERE PRECLUDED FROM RECEIVING MUSTERING-OUT PAY BECAUSE THEIR ENTITLEMENT WAS ESTABLISHED ONLY AS A RESULT OF A COURT OF CLAIMS DECISION IN 1962 A PERIOD OF TIME IN WHICH TO APPLY FOR AND BE PAID MUSTERING-OUT PAYMENT IN CONNECTION WITH ACTIVE DUTY PERFORMED IN THE KOREAN CONFLICT.
B-163149, JAN. 31, 1968
ARMED SERVICES - PAY - WORLD WAR II DECISION TO FORMER MEMBER OF ARMED FORCES FOR CLAIM INCIDENT TO SERVICE AT TIME OF DISCHARGE IN 1946. SINCE CLAIMS INCIDENT FOR SERVICE IN WORLD WAR II WERE NOT RECEIVED IN GAO UNTIL MORE THAN 10 YEARS AFTER DATE OF ACCRUAL, CONSIDERATION IS PRECLUDED. CLAIMANT IS ADVISED OF BENEFITS UNDER CERTAIN RECENT LAWS (P.L. 89 50, AND 89-358) WHICH ARE NOT APPLICABLE.
TO MR. MAXIMINO Q. CRUZ:
FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 27, 1967, CONCERNING YOUR CLAIMS FOR CERTAIN ITEMS OF PAY BELIEVED TO BE DUE INCIDENT TO YOUR SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AT DATE OF DISCHARGE ON JULY 4, 1946.
YOU REFER TO CERTAIN LAWS WHICH YOU APPARENTLY BELIEVE MADE YOUR CLAIMS VALID AND PROPERLY FOR CONSIDERATION BY THIS OFFICE. HOWEVER, THE LAWS YOU CITE HAVE NO BEARING ON YOUR CASE.
THE ACT OF OCTOBER 9, 1940, CH. 796, 54 STAT. 1086, COPY OF WHICH YOU FORWARDED WITH YOUR LETTER, RESTRICTS THE DELIVERY OF U.S. GOVERNMENT CHECKS IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY IN WHICH THERE IS NOT REASONABLE ASSURANCE THAT THE PAYEES WILL ACTUALLY RECEIVE SUCH CHECKS AND BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE THEM FOR FULL VALUE. YOU DO NOT ALLEGE THAT ANY CHECKS DRAWN TO YOUR ORDER HAVE BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE SPECIAL DEPOSIT ACCOUNT ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO THE ACT.
THE ACT OF JUNE 24, 1965, PUBLIC LAW 89-50, 79 STAT. 173, WAS ENACTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING A RELATIVELY SMALL NUMBER OF OFFICERS WHO WERE PRECLUDED FROM RECEIVING MUSTERING-OUT PAY BECAUSE THEIR ENTITLEMENT WAS ESTABLISHED ONLY AS A RESULT OF A COURT OF CLAIMS DECISION IN 1962 A PERIOD OF TIME IN WHICH TO APPLY FOR AND BE PAID MUSTERING-OUT PAYMENT IN CONNECTION WITH ACTIVE DUTY PERFORMED IN THE KOREAN CONFLICT. APPARENTLY YOU PERFORMED NO DUTY IN KOREA.
THE VETERANS' READJUSTMENT BENEFITS ACT OF 1966, APPROVED MARCH 3, 1966, PUBLIC LAW 89-358, 80 STAT. 12, PROVIDES FOR CERTAIN VOCATIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL BENEFITS TO CERTAIN VETERANS WHO SERVED ON ACTIVE DUTY AFTER JANUARY 31, 1955, OR WERE DISCHARGED AFTER THAT DATE FOR A SERVICE- CONNECTED DISABILITY. THAT ACT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ACTIVE DUTY PAY AND ALLOWANCES OR MUSTERING-OUT PAY.
BY LETTERS DATED APRIL 5, JUNE 22 AND OCTOBER 16, 1967, OUR CLAIMS DIVISION ENDEAVORED TO EXPLAIN WHY YOUR CLAIMS MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED HERE. THE BARRING ACT OF OCTOBER 9, 1940, CH. 788, 54 STAT. 1061, 31 U.S.C. 71A, 237, IS AN ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION AGAINST CONSIDERATION BY THIS OFFICE OF ANY CLAIM WHICH IS NOT RECEIVED IN THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE WITHIN 10 FULL YEARS AFTER THE DATE SUCH CLAIM FIRST ACCRUED. WHETHER SUCH CLAIMS ARE VALID OR NOT IS IMMATERIAL. SINCE YOUR CLAIMS WERE NOT RECEIVED WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT, CONSIDERATION THEREOF IS FORBIDDEN BY LAW.
ACCORDINGLY, THERE IS NO ACTION WE LEGALLY MAY TAKE IN THE MATTER AND FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE RELATING THERETO WOULD SERVE NO USEFUL PURPOSE.