authorizing the War Department to settle domestic claims in the amount of $1,000. Heretofore the maximum has been $500. Senator AUSTIN. Mr. Chairman, I am interested in these remarks about what can be done after a settlement. I would like to inquire what the meaning of the following sentence is, on page 3 in lines 5 to 9: Any such settlement made by the Secretary of War, or his designee, under the authority of this act and such regulations as he may prescribe hereunder, shall be final and conclusive for all purposes, notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary. Senator CHANDLER. I was just asking about that a while ago. We have had quite a discussion about that. I would like the colonel to explain it to you. Colonel CLARK. That, with other language of the bill, has two related elements, Senator. For instance, an administrative settlement by the Secretary of War is not, under this language, subject to review by the Comptroller General. He could not hold up the accounts of the disbursing officer who paid on a voucher certified to him by the administrative settlement branch in the War Department. That is one. The other is that if the individual accepts this award he gives a release, which every disbursing officer is required to take when he pays out appropriated funds of the Government, he gives an unconditional release on his claim and his claim is satisfied. That is the purpose of the language of that provision. Senator AUSTIN. Now, then, from what I have overheard, it was to the effect that he could after that go to Congress and present a claim to the Congress for the same subject matter. Do you believe that? Colonel CLARK. I do not believe the Congress, under those conditions, would grant relief to the individual. It is not, as I would interpret it, a statutory prohibition to his forever after making a claim. Senator AUSTIN. I think men might differ about that, because it says it shall be final and conclusive for all purposes. That affects him as much as it does anybody, in my judgment. Colonel CLARK. It is intended primarily to be a fiscal determination, so the accounts of the disbursing officer paying it will not be affected. Senator HILL. That language will not apply where he did not accept the determination, he would not be bound by that? Colonel CLARK. No, sir. The Congress has, in several statutes, used language to that effect, and which had a purpose similar to what I have explained, to avoid too much domestic wrangling in the fiscal affairs of the Government in determining whether or not a disbursement is subject to review and disallowance by the Comptroller General and other agencies. Senator REVERCOMB. Mr. Chairman, as I understand this language, it would be absolutely binding upon any court or governmental agency. Of course, Congress could grant it or not; so, the presence of the language would not have any effect upon Congress, but it would be final upon any court, and it would be binding upon any court or governmental agency. Am I right about that? Colonel CLARK. It would be binding upon the agencies and officers of the War Department, those in the Government having to do with the fiscal determination of the matter. It would not, in my opinion, be binding upon the Congress. The conscience of the Congress determines whether or not relief is granted in any case. Senator AUSTIN. Really, this is not so much a judicial proceeding as it is a negotiation for agreement with the claimant. Colonel CLARK. That is true. Senator AUSTIN. That is what it is. Colonel CLARK. That is true. It is an authorization that the administrative officers of the War Department may, if acceptable and agreeable to the claimant, pay up to a certain amount for damages caused to him by a governmental instrumentality. Senator AUSTIN. Yes. Colonel CLARK. If acceptable, he takes it, and it is said promptly. Senator AUSTIN. Of course, the sentence I called attention to relates to a settlement. That means acceptance by the claimant. Colonel CLARK. By the claimant. He could deny the proffer or decline to take it. Senator HILL. It is a voluntary agreement on the part of the claimant. Colonel CLARK. Yes. Senator AUSTIN. The very first paragraph says that, on page 1, lines 8 and 9, "where accepted by the claimant in full satisfaction and final settlement." I think the whole theory of this bill-and I read it before two or three times, or one like it; I am not sure this is the exact bill-has there been another bill? Senator HILL. In reference to foreign claims. Colonel CLARK. The foreign claims bill. The CHAIRMAN. That is the same thing, but it applies to foreign claims. Senator AUSTIN. I have no further questions. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions, gentlemen? Senator WILSON. I think we should give this more consideration. Personally, I would like to give it more consideration. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions by any members of the committee? Colonel WATT. Colonel, I believe you have an amendment on page. 5, section 5b. Colonel CLARK. Yes. It was suggested after consideration by some of the coordinating agencies on this, particularly, I believe, the engineers, that on line 17, page 5, we add a few words of what was believed to be a clarifying statement. That reads: The provisions of this act shall be applicable also to civilian personnel and civilian employees of the War Department or of the Army, including such personnel and employees engaged on civil works. That "including such personnel and employees engaged on civil works," I offer as a suggested amendment here by way merely of an explanation. I do not believe it has any qualifying or changing element in the effect of or interpretation of the statute, but the thought was by the engineering department to be sure that it covered the civil employees in civil works as well. Senator GURNEY. I would like to inquire, Mr. Chairman. Senator GURNEY. I would like to ask if there is any information here as to whether the Navy has similar powers? If they do not have similar powers I think a like authority should be given the Navy at the same time that we give it to the War Department, so as to clear them both up at once. The CHAIRMAN. What about that, Colonel? Colonel CLARK. The Navy, I understand, has no objection to this bill at all. Of course, it is a War Department administrative bill or authorization, and they have their own. Some of their statutes are different. I think they have a negligence claim bill particularly relating to vessels where there is a $3,000 administrative settlement now. We do not wish to get into the difficulty of trying to make this bill, which we were offering as a War Department bill, applicable to the Navy, because there are many elements of difference existing fundamentally between the two departments. However, I see no reason why a similar bill could not also be applicable to any other department which has an activity similar to ours and for a similar purpose. Colonel BOYD. The Navy does not have the large volume of motorvehicle accidents, of course, that we do, and the number of claims which would apply to them would be very much smaller. I suspect the Navy would be very glad to have the mechanics of this bill. It has been discussed with them. The CHAIRMAN. Do you know whether they have a similar bill? Colonel CLARK. I might add, sir, that the Negligence Act, which is perhaps the broadest act on the administrative settlement that we have the 1922 Negligence Act is applicable to all departments of the Government. That authorizes the administrative determination of claims against the Government caused by negligence, and their certification to the Congress. It does not authorize any administrative officer to pay anything under that act. They simply ascertain and determine and group these claims and certify them to the Congress from time to time. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions, Senator? Do any members of the committee wish to direct any inquiries to either of the officers present at the table? Otherwise, we will excuse you, gentlemen. We will give consideration to the bill later. HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON MILITARY AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE SEVENTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON S. 966 A BILL TO PROVIDE FOR THE PAYMENT IN ADVANCE OF MAY 4, 1943 Printed for the use of the Committee on Military Affairs UNITED STATES WASHINGTON: 1943 |