Skip to main content

B-161471, JUN. 14, 1967

B-161471 Jun 14, 1967
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

DEL COLLE: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS TO THIS OFFICE DATED MAY 2 AND JUNE 2. THIS MATTER WAS THE SUBJECT OF OUR LETTER DATED DECEMBER 19. WHICH DENIED YOUR CLAIM FOR THE REASONS THAT THE OFFICIAL RECORDS SHOW THAT YOU WERE PLACED IN A NONPAY STATUS PRIOR TO THE DATES FOR WHICH YOU CLAIM PAYMENT. YOU NOW CONTEND THAT YOUR RECORDS SHOULD REFLECT THAT YOU WERE PLACED IN A NONPAY STATUS ON FEBRUARY 28. THE DATE YOU WERE TRANSFERRED TO THE ACTIVE STATUS POOL AT THE NAVAL RESERVE MANPOWER CENTER AND YOU REQUEST RECONSIDERATION OF YOUR CLAIM. YOU CONTEND THAT YOUR RECORDS WERE ALTERED WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION AND CLAIM DISCRIMINATION AGAINST YOU BY YOUR SQUADRON COMMANDER. THE RECORD BEFORE US INDICATES THAT YOU WERE INITIALLY PLACED IN A NONPAY STATUS EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 11.

View Decision

B-161471, JUN. 14, 1967

TO MR. LOUIS E. DEL COLLE:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS TO THIS OFFICE DATED MAY 2 AND JUNE 2, 1967, AND TO THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS DATED MAY 8, 1967, CONCERNING YOUR CLAIM FOR NAVAL RESERVE DRILL PAY FOR FEBRUARY 12 AND 13, 1966. THIS MATTER WAS THE SUBJECT OF OUR LETTER DATED DECEMBER 19, 1966, WHICH DENIED YOUR CLAIM FOR THE REASONS THAT THE OFFICIAL RECORDS SHOW THAT YOU WERE PLACED IN A NONPAY STATUS PRIOR TO THE DATES FOR WHICH YOU CLAIM PAYMENT.

YOU NOW CONTEND THAT YOUR RECORDS SHOULD REFLECT THAT YOU WERE PLACED IN A NONPAY STATUS ON FEBRUARY 28, 1966, THE DATE YOU WERE TRANSFERRED TO THE ACTIVE STATUS POOL AT THE NAVAL RESERVE MANPOWER CENTER AND YOU REQUEST RECONSIDERATION OF YOUR CLAIM. IN ADDITION, YOU CONTEND THAT YOUR RECORDS WERE ALTERED WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION AND CLAIM DISCRIMINATION AGAINST YOU BY YOUR SQUADRON COMMANDER.

THE RECORD BEFORE US INDICATES THAT YOU WERE INITIALLY PLACED IN A NONPAY STATUS EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 11, 1966, BY CONTEMPORANEOUS ORDER OF YOUR SQUADRON COMMANDER AS A RESULT OF A REDUCTION IN RESERVE PERSONNEL CEILING CAUSING AN EXCESS OF PERSONNEL IN YOUR RATING. REFERENCE TO THIS ORDER WAS ENTERED ON YOUR UNIT'S RESERVE UNIT PERSONNEL AND PERFORMANCE REPORT (RUPPERT) FOR THE MONTH ENDING FEBRUARY 28, 1966. ON THAT DATE YOU WERE TRANSFERRED FROM YOU SQUADRON TO THE ACTIVE STATUS POOL AT THE NAVAL RESERVE MANPOWER CENTER. YOU WERE DISCHARGED FROM THE NAVAL RESERVE EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 1966.

THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR AN ENTRY WAS MADE IN YOUR PERSONNEL RECORD SHOWING THE DATE OF YOUR TRANSFER TO THE ACTIVE STATUS POOL AS BEING THE DATE OF YOUR CHANGE TO A NONPAY STATUS. IT APPEARS THAT UPON DISCOVERY OF THIS DISCREPANCY YOU SOUGHT TO HAVE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF YOUR TRANSFER TO A NONPAY STATUS (FEBRUARY 11, 1966) CHANGED IN THE RUPPERT REPORT SO AS TO CONFORM WITH THE DATE OF SUCH TRANSFER THEN SHOWN IN YOUR PERSONNEL RECORDS. YOUR REQUEST WAS DENIED BY YOUR SQUADRON COMMANDER, BUT THE DATE OF THE CHANGE IN PAY STATUS AS SHOWN IN YOUR PERSONNEL RECORDS WAS CORRECTED TO CONFORM WITH THE RUPPERT REPORT AS INITIALLY ORDERED BY YOUR SQUADRON COMMANDER.

WHILE YOU CLAIM INJUSTICE AND DISCRIMINATION BY BEING PLACED IN A NONPAY STATUS ON FEBRUARY 11, 1966, AND THE CHANGE IN YOUR PERSONNEL RECORD, THE FILE AMPLY REFLECTS THAT YOU HAD BEEN TIMELY ADVISED OF YOUR CHANGE TO A NONPAY STATUS ON FEBRUARY 11. WHERE THERE IS A DISPUTE BETWEEN A CLAIMANT AND AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE INVOLVING A QUESTION OF FACT, THIS OFFICE MUST ACCEPT THE ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION OF FACT AS BEING PROPER IN THE ABSENCE OF STRONG EVIDENCE THAT SUCH DETERMINATION IS ERRONEOUS. SUCH EVIDENCE DOES NOT APPEAR IN THIS CASE. CONSEQUENTLY, YOUR ENTITLEMENT TO PAY AND ALLOWANCES MUST BE DETERMINED ON THE RECORD AS REPORTED TO US BY THE NAVY DEPARTMENT AND SINCE THAT RECORD SHOWS THAT YOU WERE PLACED IN A NONPAY STATUS EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 11, 1966, THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM IS SUSTAINED.

WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR REQUEST FOR INFORMATION AS TO THE "APPEALING AGENCY" TO WHICH YOU MAY APPLY FOR FURTHER HELP IN THIS MATTER, YOU ARE ADVISED THAT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 31 U.S.C. 71 AND 74 THE DECISIONS OF THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL ARE FINAL AND CONCLUSIVE ON ALL OFFICERS OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT. HOWEVER, THE UNITED STATES COURT OF CLAIMS AND THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS HAVE JURISDICTION TO CONSIDER CERTAIN CLAIMS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT IF THE APPROPRIATE ACTION IS FILED IN ONE OF THOSE COURTS WHEN WITHIN SIX YEARS FOLLOWING THE DATE SUCH CLAIMS FIRST ACCRUED.

GAO Contacts

Shirley A. Jones
Managing Associate General Counsel
Office of the General Counsel

Media Inquiries

Sarah Kaczmarek
Managing Director
Office of Public Affairs

Public Inquiries