B-165383, NOV. 29, 1968
Highlights
RAFAEL MEDINA CEPEDA: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 1. THIS MATTER WAS THE SUBJECT OF OUR DECISION DATED OCTOBER 25. YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED ON THE BASIS OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF OCTOBER 9. YOU AGAIN STATE THAT YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH THE ACTION TAKEN IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR CLAIM AND CONTEND THAT YOU AND OTHER PERSONS RELEASED FROM SERVICE SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF OCTOBER 9. THAT ACT IS ONE OF THE PUBLIC LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND IT IS PRESUMED IN LAW THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL WHO MAY BE AFFECTED BY SUCH A STATUTE HAS KNOWLEDGE OF ITS PROVISIONS. SINCE YOUR CLAIM WAS NOT RECEIVED WITHIN THE STATUTORY PERIOD. CONSIDERATION THEREOF IS NOT AUTHORIZED AND THE ACTION HERETOFORE TAKEN ON YOUR CLAIM IS SUSTAINED.
B-165383, NOV. 29, 1968
TO MR. RAFAEL MEDINA CEPEDA:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 1, 1968, REQUESTING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF YOUR CLAIM FOR ARREARS OF PAY BELIEVED TO BE DUE INCIDENT TO YOUR SERVICE IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY DURING AND FOLLOWING THE KOREAN CONFLICT.
THIS MATTER WAS THE SUBJECT OF OUR DECISION DATED OCTOBER 25, 1968, B- 165383, AS WELL AS A NUMBER OF LETTERS FROM OUR CLAIMS DIVISION. YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED ON THE BASIS OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF OCTOBER 9, 1940, CH. 788, 54 STAT. 1061, 31 U.S.C. 71A, WHICH BARS ANY CLAIM COGNIZABLE BY THIS OFFICE IF NOT RECEIVED HERE WITHIN 10 YEARS AFTER SUCH CLAIM FIRST ACCRUED.
YOU AGAIN STATE THAT YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH THE ACTION TAKEN IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR CLAIM AND CONTEND THAT YOU AND OTHER PERSONS RELEASED FROM SERVICE SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF OCTOBER 9, 1940. THAT ACT IS ONE OF THE PUBLIC LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND IT IS PRESUMED IN LAW THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL WHO MAY BE AFFECTED BY SUCH A STATUTE HAS KNOWLEDGE OF ITS PROVISIONS. ACCORDINGLY, SINCE YOUR CLAIM WAS NOT RECEIVED WITHIN THE STATUTORY PERIOD, CONSIDERATION THEREOF IS NOT AUTHORIZED AND THE ACTION HERETOFORE TAKEN ON YOUR CLAIM IS SUSTAINED.
WHILE WE HAVE ALWAYS TAKEN THE POSITION THAT DISALLOWED CLAIMS WILL BE RECONSIDERED IF NEW EVIDENCE OF ENTITLEMENT IS PRESENTED, YOUR LETTER HAS PROVIDED NO INFORMATION OR FACTS WHICH WOULD AFFECT YOUR CLAIM.