Office of the General Counsel

S9600887
[Agency]
Re: Backpay claim of [xxx]

Dear Ms.[xxx]:

We have reviewed the backpay claim that you submitted to the General Accounting Office (GAO) on April 19, 1996, concerning [xxx], a Self-Determination Specialist at [agency]. For the reasons expressed herein, Mr. [xxx]' claim is denied.

Mr. [xxx]' claim is based on four periods of service during which he asserts that he had been detailed to a higher graded position. As reported in your letter, these four periods are as follows: (1) April 23, 1990 through September 22, 1990; (2) September 23, 1990 through October 1, 1991; (3) August 8, 1993 through December 5, 1993; and (4) May 3, 1994 through April 8, 1995. Your letter explained that an agreement had been reached concerning the fourth period of service. This decision is, therefore, limited to the first three periods of Mr. [xxx]' backpay claim.

As explained in your letter, there is no official documentation for substantial portions of Mr. [xxx]' claim. Generally speaking, where the official record does not support a claim, the claim must be denied. See 4 C.F.R. 31.7. See also Nathaniel C. Carter, B-238487, May 25, 1990; Jones and Short, B-205282, June 15, 1982; and Wade B. Bumgardner, B-184795, August 5, 1976. However, the lack of official documentation is only one of the reasons why Mr. [xxx]' claim for backpay has been denied.

While federal law prohibits agencies from detailing employees for more than 120 days unless the detail has been renewed, it is well settled that the failure of an employing federal agency to comply with the 120 day restriction does not result in entitlement to backpay. United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 400 (1976); Wilson v. United States, 229 Ct.Cl. 510 (1981); and Everett Turner ("Turner-Caldwell III"), 61 Comp.Gen. 408, May 25, 1982.

Sincerely yours,

Murray M. Meeker
Senior Attorney