Lieutenant Colonel J. C. Kelly
| Decision Date | 12 July 1965 |
| Docket Number | B-156292 |
| Parties | LIEUTENANT COLONEL J. C. KELLY, FINANCE CORPS |
| Court | Comptroller General of the United States |
Your letter of March 4, 1965, fincy-t, addressed to the director of our claims division, forwarded, for advice as to the propriety of settlement on a formula basis, approximately 47 claims in the amount of $9, 704.03 made by states steamship company, 320 California street, san francisco 4, California for refund of amounts collected during the fiscal years 1955 and 1956 from that company or the pacific transport lines 262 California street, san francisco, California. Your letter asks, if the propriety of passing on such formula is not a matter upon which our claims division is authorized to comment, that the file be returned to you with advice as to what action should be taken to resolve the claims.
The file forwarded with your letter shows the claims were prepared by states steamship company August 21 and 22, 1962 and represent claims for the difference between the full overtime cost of certain civil service employees assessed during the 1955 and 1956 fiscal years for terminal services in connection with the loading of berth cargo on states steamship or pacific transport lines vessels at the oakland (California) army terminal and the overtime differential costs as construed by the armed services board of contract appeals in ASBCA decision no. 5721 dated June 13, 1960. Copies of the correspondence enclosed with your letter indicate the likelihood that other steamship companies which berthed at army terminals May present similar claims; that although some question originally was raised as to whether such claims were allowable, such claims were the subject of numerous memoranda of various officials of the department of defense and that similar claims for refund of charges assessed in excess of those properly due as construed by the armed services board of contract appeals but for later periods were settled administratively; and that, in addition to the propriety of settling the 47 claims on the formula basis proposed, there is some doubt as to the appropriation or fund to be charged.
Our claims division is not authorized to render an authoritative decision on such matters which more properly might be made the subject of a request to the comptroller general for an advance decision by the head of the department involved. See 26 Comp.Gen. 797 and 993; 41 Id. 767 and 43 Id. 227. Accordingly, and since unless promptly considered by the general accounting office, some portions of the instant claims as well as similar claims which May be filed with your finance center May become barred under 31 U.S.C. 71 (A) and the record requires development (1) as to the fund to which the excessive collections were deposited so that the appropriation involved May be ascertained and (2) of the authority of states steamship company to be paid refunds of excess collections made from pacific transport lines, we have today instructed our claims division to consider and settle the 47 claims after developing such information. For use in the prompt disposition of these claims, we would appreciate your furnishing a report as to the fund to which the excess collections in the approximately 47 cases was credited and your recommendation as to the fund to be charged.
As to the formula, the armed services board of contract appeals in appeal of states steamship company, ASBCA no. 5721, ruled that the "overtime differential costs" provided in the contract under which assessment for overtime work performed by certain civil service employees of the oakland (...
To continue reading
Request your trial