recovery of $4,173,160 was sought. During the same period, we prepared reports and furnished a large volume of records and many exhibits for use in the defense of 91 suits, which were filed in this and previous years, involving 15,547 shipments and $5,375,082. Sixty suits, which were the subject of reports in this and previous years, involving 17,671 shipments and claims for $4,418,926, were settled during the year by payment of judgments totaling $1,820,255.

During the year, we reported to the Department of Justice, for collection by proceedings before the Interstate Commerce Commission, 15 cases involving overpayments of $23,275 made to rail carriers as a result of the application of unreasonable rates or charges. These overpayments were uncollectible by our Office because the Transportation Act of 1940, 49 U.S.C. 66, as amended by Public Law 85-762, 72 Stat. 861, limits our collection authority to the recovery of overcharges defined as charges in excess of those applicable under rates in tariffs lawfully on file with the Interstate Commerce Commission or established in accordance with section 22 of the Interstate Commerce Act.

INDIAN TRIBAL CLAIMS

The General Accounting Office prepares for the Attorney General detailed reports concerning petitions filed against the United States before the Indian Claims Commission or the United States Court of Claims.

The Indian Claims Commission, created by the act of August 13, 1946, 60 Stat. 1049, is vested with the jurisdiction to hear and determine claims against the United States on behalf of any Indian tribe, band, or other identifiable group of American Indians residing within the territorial limits of the United States including Alaska, provided such claims accrued before the date of the approval of the act, and were filed within 5 years after that date. Before the creation of the Commission, claims of Indian tribes were heard and determined by the United States Court of Claims only when jurisdiction was conferred upon it in each case by special acts of the Congress.

The reports are prepared in response to requests from the Attorney General and deal with the particular accounting prob

lems presented by the petitions. Generally the reports include an accounting showing the extent to which various treaty obligations have been fulfilled by the United States, an accounting of investments and trust funds, and in most cases a statement of gratuitous expenditures for consideration as possible offsets against any judgment which may be rendered against the United States.

The preparation of these reports involves extensive research since the information required is compiled from reports of the Bureau of American Ethnology, House and Senate documents, records of the Defense, Treasury, and Interior Departments, the General Accounting Office, and the National Archives and Records Service dating back to the year 1795.

Assembling the information and compiling it into a finished report involves a comprehensive analysis of the claims recited in each case, preparation of a history of the particular tribe of Indians, its migrations and unions with other tribes, and an analysis of all treaties made with the tribe and acts of Congress affecting it.

During the fiscal year 1962, 49 reports were forwarded to the Attorney General and 2 petitions were dismissed by the Indian Claims Commission. There are at present 157 reports on petitions in process of preparation and 18 additional petitions on which reports have been requested and which are awaiting examination. In addition, reports in answer to certain of the claims in six other petitions were forwarded to the Attorney General as special reports. Fifty-eight petitions were filed during the fiscal year.

Further information concerning reports furnished to the Department of Justice is shown in the appendix at page 309.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA GOVERNMENT

Our work in the District of Columbia Government during the fiscal year 1962 consisted of reviews in several departments, including the Departments of Licenses and Inspections, Public Welfare, General Administration, and Occupations and Professions. We also undertook reviews, on a District-wide basis, of cash collection procedures and fund control records.

At the requests of the chairmen of the Subcommittees on the District of Columbia, Senate and House Committees on Appropriations, our Office participated with the Department of Public Welfare in an investigation of selected cases administered by its Public Assistance Division under the Aid to Dependent Children Program. The purpose of the investigation was to determine the facts having a bearing on the eligibility of the recipients of financial assistance and to establish whether, on the basis of the facts, the recipients were eligible for such assistance. Our report on this investigation was submitted to the chairmen of the subcommittees in July 1962.

We issued three reports to the Congress: one in February 1962 on our review of selected activities of the Department of Licenses and Inspections, another in June 1962 on the administration of the public assistance and surplus food distribution programs, Department of Public Welfare, and the third in June 1962 on tax and other revenue collection activities of the Finance Office, Department of General Administration.

The principal weaknesses disclosed by our review of the Department of Licenses and Inspections were (1) inconsistencies in the administration of the District of Columbia Standard Weights and Measures Law, (2) failure to make inspections of multiple dwellings and other facilities at the legally required frequencies, and (3) failure to develop records or to make periodic studies for the purpose of establishing fees for licenses and permits commensurate with costs. The Board of Commissioners generally agreed with our suggestions for corrective action and informed us that measures had been or would be taken to assure uniform application in enforcing violations of the District of Columbia Standard Weights and Measures Law, to adjust the frequency of inspections, and to make a biennial review of fees charged for licenses and permits.

In our report to the Congress on our review of the public assistance and surplus food distribution programs of the Department of Public Welfare, we commented on inadequate determinations of eligibility of recipients of financial assistance and the amount of the assistance, and on delays in discontinuing financial assistance payments upon the receipt of field investigative reports containing facts warranting their discontinuance.

We reported on the very limited use of social workers' time for making visits to homes of recipients of financial assistance to obtain data having a bearing on the recipients' continued eligibility and for carrying out other social service activities, and on the uneven distribution of the caseload among social workers which contributed to some of the deficiencies in determining recipients' eligibility for continued assistance. Also, we commented on the District Government's failure to get the maximum Federal grants available to it in carrying out its old-age assistance program.

We suggested that the Public Assistance Division's continuing sample review program to ascertain whether the social workers obtained all the evidence required in support of their determinations of eligibility for financial assistance be carried on by personnel not directly engaged in granting public assistance and that the results be reported to management responsible for the administration of the public assistance programs. We pointed out that the delays in discontinuing financial assistance payments, failure to take action on overpayments, and other deficiencies indicated a need for taking steps to assure that prescribed procedures are followed. In addition, we suggested that consideration be given to relieving the social workers of all possible clerical duties thus making more of their time available for home visits and other social service activities, that the social workers' caseloads be more evenly distributed, and that procedures be adopted for preparing accurate monthly reports which would bring about the maximum Federal grants available.

The president, Board of Commissioners, informed us in May 1962 that a special task force had been organized to study the administrative problems of the Department of Public Welfare, including those commented on in our report. He also informed us that the Department would further extend the sampling review program, develop other controls, and provide for an independent sampling of the cases reviewed. We were further informed that the Department of Public Welfare is taking the necessary steps to process all cases involving any type of overpayment, erroneous payment, or fraud for appropriate action and to get the maximum Federal grants available.

In our report on the review of tax and other revenue collection activities of the Finance Office, Department of General Administration, we pointed out the need to fully comply with the provision of the District Income and Franchise Tax Act of 1947 which prohibits the issuing of business privilege licenses to applicants who fail or refuse to pay any taxes imposed by the act. We also suggested that consideration be given to the feasibility of setting up a single compliance unit within the Finance Office to carry out more effectively the program of determining whether business establishments and residents have filed the tax returns and obtained the licenses required under the District tax laws. We suggested also that procedures be developed for enforcing the District tax laws which provide for the collection of employees' withheld income taxes from the persons who are responsible for the withholding and remitting of such taxes. Other suggestions related to the need for placing certain revenue collections under accounting control and for revising other revenue collection practices. The Board generally agreed with our suggestions and informed us that appropriate action would be taken.

FEDERAL AVIATION AGENCY

Our audit work in the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) during the fiscal year 1962 included reviews of (1) financial and administrative activities related to the construction of the Dulles International Airport, (2) aircraft procurement, use, and maintenance at various bases, (3) selected air traffic management operations and related administrative activities of certain operating facilities of the Eastern Region, and (4) financial and administrative activities of the Washington National Airport; the Eastern, Western, and Pacific Regional Offices; the National Aviation Facilities Experimental Center in Atlantic City, N.J.; the Aeronautical Center in Oklahoma City, Okla.; and the central office in Washington, D.C. We submitted two reports to the Congress during the year.

In our report of October 1961 to the Congress on the review of the materiel supply and distribution system at the Facilities and