or naval record where in their judgment such action is necessary to correct an error or remove an injustice, and corrections so made shall be final and conclusive on all officers of the Government except when procured by means of fraud: Provided, That procedures set up by the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force in accordance with this subsection shall be approved by the Secretary of Defense: Provided further, That no corrective action shall be taken under this subsection unless the request therefor be filed by claimant, his heirs at law, or legal representatives within three years after his or their discovery of the alleged error or injustice, or within ten years after the date of enactment of this Act, whichever be the later: Provided further, That the failure to file the request by claimant, his heirs at law, or legal representative, within three years after his or their discovery of the alleged error or injustice may be excused by such board of civilian officers or employees of the respective Departments upon finding by it that it is in the interest of justice to excuse such failure to file within the prescribed time in which event action shall be taken in the same manner as if the request had been filed within the three years as prescribed herein.

"(b) The Department concerned is authorized to pay, out of applicable current appropriations, claims of any persons, their heirs at law or legal representatives as hereinafter provided, of amounts paid as fines, forfeitures, or for losses of pay (including retired or retirement pay), allowances, compensation, emoluments, or other monetary benefits, as the case may be, which are found to be due on account of military or naval service as a result of the action heretofore taken pursuant to section 207 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, or hereafter taken pursuant to subsection (a) of this section: Provided, That in the case of deceased persons where no demand is presented by a duly appointed legal representative of the estate, payments otherwise due hereunder shall be made to the decedent's widow, widower, legal heirs, or beneficiaries, in the order of precedence or succession as may be prescribed by the applicable provisions of law relating to the kind of payment involved and when not otherwise so provided, in the order of precedence as set forth in the Act of February 25, 1946 (60 Stat. 30), or as may be prescribed by the applicable provisions of law relating to the kind of payment involved.

"(c) The acceptance by the claimant of any settlement made pursuant to subsection (b) of this section shall constitute a complete release by the claimant of any claim against the United States on account of such correction of record. "(d) Applicable current appropriations shall be available for payment of such sums as may be due for continuing the pay (including retired or retirement pay), allowances, compensation, emoluments, and other monetary benefits to persons who shall have received payment pursuant to the provisions of subsection (b) of this section and who may be entitled to such continuing payments as a result of the correction of their military or naval records: Provided, That continuing payments are authorized to be made to such personnel for not more than one year following the date of the correction or one year following the date of enactment of this Act, whichever be the later, without the necessity of reenlistment, appointment, or reappointment to the grade, rank, or office to which such pay (including retired or retirement pay), allowances, compensation, emoluments, and other monetary benefits are attached, and such reenlistments, appointments, and reappointments are hereby authorized by the Secretary concerned without regard to other qualifications."

SEC. 2. This Act shall be effective from and after August 2, 1946.
Passed the House of Representatives July 2, 1951.
Attest:

RALPH R. ROBERTS, Clerk.

Senator HUNT. Mr. Jackson, you may proceed, please.

STATEMENT OF STEPHEN S. JACKSON, OFFICE OF COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE; ACCOMPANIED BY WILLIAM H. BAIER, ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD FOR THE CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS; AND C. M. WIGGIN, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE BOARD FOR THE CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

Mr. JACKSON. My name is Stephen S. Jackson. I am of the Office of Counsel, of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Department of Defense, which is recommending passage of this bill.

My statement is addressed to the House bill in view of the fact that this was introduced in the House originally. There have been several changes which I believe are not reflected in the Senate bill.

Senator HUNT. We are going to consider the House bill, Mr. Jackson, in lieu of the Senate bill.

Mr. JACKSON. The Department of Defense_recommends that this act to amend section 207 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 so as to authorize payment of claims arising from the correction of military or naval records be enacted by the Senate. This proposal has been approved by the Bureau of the Budget and passed the House of Representatives July 2, 1951.

In August 1946, Congress gave to the Secretaries of the armed services and the Secretary of the Treasury-with respect to the Coast Guard-authority for the correction of military and naval records where such action is necessary to correct error or remove injustices. Some of these errors or injustices result in the deprivation of monetary benefits to the applicant. While the record can be corrected, the loss of monetary benefits cannot be corrected. A decision of the Comptroller General of the United States dated May 20, 1948, 270G709, held that

Neither section 207 nor other legislation vests in the head of the specified department or in this office any authority to order or direct the allowance or payment of any claim for money, or to use appropriated funds to pay any claim for money, based on corrections made on military or naval records of an individual under the authority of that section.

H. R. 1181 would realistically implement the action taken in 1946 by amending section 207 so as to authorize the Department concerned to pay claims found to be due as a result of action taken pursuant to section 207 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946.

H. R. 1181 authorizes payment of benefits which have been found to be due in the past but which could not be paid because of the Comptroller General's opinion, as well as such claims in the future.

When the original bill which the Department of Defense recommended was considered before the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives, three specific objections were interposed by the General Accounting Office. First, the lack of any time limitation in the bill. The Department of Defense was opposed to any time limitation but withdrew its opposition if the proviso set forth in the present act-page 2, lines 13 to 21-were adopted, whereby the boards would have authority to excuse compliance with the limitation in cases where an injustice would result to a member of the armed services who, for instance, because of injury in combat, capture, participation in combat or other exigencies or military service might render it impracticable for him to file his claim within the prescribed period.

Second, the General Accounting Office objected to the original language making settlements final and conclusive. The Department of Defense yielded and accepted the language submitted by the General Accounting Office on this point.

Third, the General Accounting Office objected to the language set forth in section 1 (d) of the original bill which provided that payments could be made without the necessity of reenlistment or appointment of the persons concerned, to the grade, rank, or office to which such pay or benefits are attached. The Department of Defense was

opposed to this change but withdrew its opposition and accepted the compromise language approved by the House which would authorize continuing payments up to a year following the date of correction or passage of the act without the necessity of reenlistment, appointment or reappointment to the grade, rank or office to which such benefits are attached.

It would seem, therefore, that this act comes to the Senate with a resolution of its controversial features.

There is to my knowledge no other opposition to the act and I respectfully urge on behalf of the Department of Defense that this act be approved by your committee and passed by the Senate.

There are attached to this statement figures indicating the number of cases and approximate costs involved.

Senator HUNT. The table attached to your statement will be made a part of the record, Mr. Jackson.

(The table referred to above is as follows:)

Data of boards on correction of military records

Senator HUNT. Senator Flanders, we are conducting a hearing this morning on a House bill.

Senator FLANDERS. I am familiar with the purposes of the bill but not in particular.

Senator HUNT. Mr. Jackson has just finished his statement, and he represents the Department of Defense. I don't know, Mr. Jackson, that I have any questions to ask you.

Have most or a great many of these claims already been filed and adjudication taken on them and just now asking more or less for authority that they be paid?

Mr. JACKSON. Yes, sir. The figures I have submitted show the number which have had changes which involve actual payments. Some changes may involve no payments, but there are listed here on this data that I have submitted a total of 985 claims which are now awaiting authorization to be paid, in which it has been determined that the applicants are entitled to payment.

Senator HUNT. You think this would cost slightly in excess of $500,000?

Mr. JACKSON. Yes, sir. That is an appropriate figure. That is, for those presently adjudicated, as far as these orders go.

It is true that might give entitlement in some instances to some other benefits, but that is the amount that is considered by the four boards, as would be due at this time.

Senator HUNT. And this bill applies only to the correction of existing military or naval records? It doesn't apply to anticipated new cases?

Mr. JACKSON. Oh, yes, sir. It intends to carry along for new applications that may come in hereafter.

Senator HUNT. Other than those now pending?

Mr. JACKSON. Yes, sir

Senator HUNT. You put a time limit on that of some time?

Mr. JACKSON. That is a time limit in which to apply, in which to bring the claim.

This is to empower the boards from here on in, and retroactively to the date they were empowered to correct records, the authority to pay. The time limitation that is proposed is that for 10 years after the passage of the bill or 3 years after the error is discovered by the applicant, whichever is the later, they will be obliged to make their application.

Senator HUNT. What is the cause of these irregularities or these records that were not correct? Why weren't they correct? What was the cause of their being set up in such a way that you would determine that they need correction?

Mr. JACKSON. There is a wide variety of situations that result in it. Records are sometimes lost in combat, and in the pressure of things mistakes are made. We have here, sir, the representatives of all the boards, who I am sure would be glad to give you some specific instances in answer to your question.

There was a strict rule that records could not be changed without authoritative action, which motivated the act originally. The occasion for the errors is varied, and I am sure some of these gentlemen would have some more concrete instances than I have to suggest if you would like to hear them.

Senator HUNT. Now all three of the components of the services are favorable to this act. You represent the Defense Department and are speaking for all three of them; is that right?

Mr. JACKSON. Yes, sir.

Senator FLANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I note as between the table in Mr. Jackson's testimony, the table at the end, and the House Report on page 3, a difference as to the expected cost.

Mr. Jackson, you give 537,000 and odd dollars, and the House report, in the next to the last paragraph on page 3 says:

It is difficult to estimate the fiscal effects of the proposed legislation. Witnesses have estimated that the initial cost will be approximately $1,000,000. Does this mean a more careful study than was given the House? Mr. JACKSON. It is more accurate in this respect, sir. At the time we submitted the figures to the House, the Army was still processing their cases from the standpoint of cost. Up to now the cost has been academic, since they couldn't pay it; but, nevertheless, they were going over their records to ascertain what the amount would be.

The Army figures were not available, and there was a rough estimate as to what they would be. The estimate was in excess, I believe, of actually what the figures show. The Army has come up with $135,000.

Senator FLANDERS. How do you account in your figures for the Navy's being so much more than the Army?

90568-51-2

Mr. JACKSON. Perhaps I would ask someone from the Navy to answer that.

Senator FLANDERS. It might be a good idea.

Mr. JACKSON. This is Mr. Wiggin, counsel for the Board.

Mr. WIGGIN. I think I can answer that briefly, if I may. The great bulk of those adjudications are represented by changes of discharge. That is, dishonorable or bad conduct discharge.

The Navy during the war was the only service, with the exception of the Coast Guard, having a bad conduct discharge. Under the law the bad conduct discharge was interpreted exactly as a dishonorable discharge, a complete denial of benefits, et cetera.

The Navy was quite liberal in dispensing these bad conduct discharges.

Senator FLANDERS. I am a little confused. Liberal to itself or to the dischargee?

Mr. WIGGIN. I don't mean to be facetious, sir, but they were generous in giving them. They gave far too many in our Board's opinion.

Senator FLANDERS. I see.

Mr. WIGGIN. We found not only had there been error but injustices in a great many cases. A man received a bad conduct discharge where in one of the other services, for example, he perhaps would not have.

The great bulk of the Navy estimate is represented by those cases, because each of those cases contemplates, if the discharge is changed, contemplates a payment of roughly $200 terminal leave and perhaps $200 more of mustering-out payment, and a few odds and ends such as travel pay from the place of discharge to his home.

Our estimate is they average around $450 or $500. We have adjudicated a great many of those.

Senator FLANDERS. Thank you.

Senator HUNT. Do you mean that in the event of a dishonorable discharge of many, many years' standing and then the dishonorably discharged person shall submit a request to have his record cleared, and that is cleared by a board, that then he is entitled to his separation pay and his bonus?

Mr. WIGGIN. Well, sir, I would like to qualify your statement. You said one of many years' standing. Actually, 98 percent of those would relate to World War II. We have World War I applications, but the only entitlement actually would be-I have forgotten the exact description-but the bonus of World War I, the chap who was denied because of his dishonorable discharge.

Senator HUNT. The reason I asked that is I know of a specific case of a railroad engineer who got in trouble in World War I as a young man and had a dishonorable discharge. He became a very fine citizen, had three daughters who went through the university.

He came into my office a short time before I left Wyoming. He had this cloud over him. He couldn't belong to the Legion, couldn't have these benefiits, and so on.

He felt he had an indeterminate sentence that would follow him to his grace. We were able to get the records changed and he now has an honorable discharge.

Mr. BAIER. He would get World War I benefits, which I believe is the World War I bonus.