is available once there has been a “final denial” in the first instance — and by doing so fail to file suit within six months of the Government’s first “final denial,” § 14.9(b) may be used to estop the Government irom relying on the statute of limitations as a defense. The Government is incorrect in its assertion that equitable considerations are not to be considered under the FTCA and fails to recognize the significance of several cases stating otherwise. See Irwin v. Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 89, 111 S.Ct. 453, 112 L.Ed.2d 435 (1990) (establishing the general rule that equitable tolling of the statute of limitations is available in suits against the government unless Congress provides otherwise); Glarner v. U.S. Dep’t of Veterans Administration, 30 F.3d 697 (6th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). Clearly a court following Glamer must assess
holding statute of limitations should not be equitably tolled for taxpayer who filed a refund claim after the applicable statute of limitations recognizing that rcw 1073090 can be equitably tolled but declining to toll it in the particular case recognizing that  2244dlds statute of limitations can be tolled holding that  2401b of the ftca can be equitably tolled holding that 42 usc  405g may be equitably tolled based on a plaintiffs mental impairment