B-117839, DEC 31, 1953

B-117839: Dec 31, 1953

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

IT APPEARS THAT THE OFFICERS IN QUESTION WERE NOT PAID ON THE ORIGINAL PAYROLL FOR THE ASSEMBLY OF THAT DATE FOR THE REASON THAT 60 PERCENT OF THE ASSIGNED REGULARLY PARTICIPATING ENLISTED STRENGTH OF THE UNIT WAS NOT PRESENT. THE 60 PERCENT FIGURE IS ATTAINED. IT WAS NECESSARY TO USE THE QUOTIENT 5.75 (69 "TOTAL ACTUAL ATTENDANCE FOR THE QUARTER" DIVIDED BY 12 "ASSEMBLIES"). IT WILL BE SEEN THAT BY USING THE FIGURE 5.75 AS THE DIVIDEND AND 9. THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET: "(1) (A) OFFICERS ASSIGNED TO UNITS IN TRAINING PAY GROUP A ARE ENTITLED TO PAY FOR ATTENDANCE AT ANY PAID TRAINING ASSEMBLIES OF THE UNIT TO WHICH ASSIGNED WHERE THE ENLISTED ATTENDANCE IS AT LEAST 60 PERCENT OF THE UNIT'S ASSIGNED REGULARLY PARTICIPATING ENLISTED STRENGTH.

B-117839, DEC 31, 1953

PRECIS-UNAVAILABLE

LIEUTENANT COLONEL N. B. HILL, F. C., U. S. ARMY:

BY FIRST INDORSEMENT DATED NOVEMBER 24, 1953, THE CHIEF OF FINANCE REFERRED TO THIS OFFICE YOUR LETTER OF MAY 20, 1953, REQUESTING A DECISION IN CONNECTION WITH SUPPLEMENTAL INACTIVE DUTY TRAINING PAYROLL OF HQ. HQ. SVC. CO., 870TH ENGR. AVN., FOR THE PERIOD FROM JANUARY 1 TO MARCH 31, 1953, COVERING PAY OF THE NINE OFFICERS LISTED THEREIN FOR ATTENDANCE AT THE ASSEMBLY HELD ON FEBRUARY 9, 1953.

IT APPEARS THAT THE OFFICERS IN QUESTION WERE NOT PAID ON THE ORIGINAL PAYROLL FOR THE ASSEMBLY OF THAT DATE FOR THE REASON THAT 60 PERCENT OF THE ASSIGNED REGULARLY PARTICIPATING ENLISTED STRENGTH OF THE UNIT WAS NOT PRESENT. HOWEVER, BY THE ALTERNATE METHOD OF CALCULATING THE PERCENTUM OF ASSIGNED ENLISTED MEN PRESENT, THE 60 PERCENT FIGURE IS ATTAINED, BUT IT WAS NECESSARY TO USE THE QUOTIENT 5.75 (69 "TOTAL ACTUAL ATTENDANCE FOR THE QUARTER" DIVIDED BY 12 "ASSEMBLIES").

IT WILL BE SEEN THAT BY USING THE FIGURE 5.75 AS THE DIVIDEND AND 9, THE ASSIGNED ENLISTED STRENGTH ON FEBRUARY 9, AS THE DIVISOR, THE RESULTING QUOTIENT EXCEEDS 60 PERCENT BY THE "AVERAGE" METHOD OF CALCULATION.

PARAGRAPH 6B (1) (A), AR 140-250, DATED OCTOBER 7, 1952, PROVIDES:

"B. TRAINING ASSEMBLIES. - IN ADDITION TO THE MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR TRAINING ASSEMBLIES PRESCRIBED IN AR 140-305, THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET:

"(1) (A) OFFICERS ASSIGNED TO UNITS IN TRAINING PAY GROUP A ARE ENTITLED TO PAY FOR ATTENDANCE AT ANY PAID TRAINING ASSEMBLIES OF THE UNIT TO WHICH ASSIGNED WHERE THE ENLISTED ATTENDANCE IS AT LEAST 60 PERCENT OF THE UNIT'S ASSIGNED REGULARLY PARTICIPATING ENLISTED STRENGTH. SHOULD THE ENLISTED ATTENDANCE FOR ANY PARTICULAR TRAINING ASSEMBLY FALL BELOW 60 PERCENT, OFFICERS STILL MAY QUALIFY FOR PAY, PROVIDED THE AVERAGE ATTENDANCE OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL DURING THE QUARTER COVERED BY THE PAYROLL (I.E., TOTAL OF ENLISTED ATTENDANCE AT ALL PAID TRAINING ASSEMBLIES DIVIDED BY THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ASSEMBLIES IN THE QUARTER) EQUALS AT LEAST 60 PERCENT OF THE ASSIGNED REGULARLY PARTICIPATING ENLISTED STRENGTH OF THE TRAINING ASSEMBLY IN QUESTION. ***"

NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU CIRCULAR NO. 3, JANUARY 12, 1948, CITED IN YOUR LETTER, SPELLS OUT STEP BY STEP HOW THE COMPUTATION IS TO BE MADE BY THE TWO METHODS INVOLVED. THAT IS, IF BY THE FIRST METHOD 60 PERCENT OF THE ENLISTED MEN HAVE NOT ATTENDED ANY PARTICULAR DRILL, THEN, BY THE SECOND METHOD, THE AVERAGE ATTENDANCE FOR THE QUARTER IS DETERMINED AND THAT FIGURE IS USED IN LIEU OF THE ACTUAL ATTENDANCE FOR ANY PARTICULAR DRILL.

IN YOUR LETTER YOU INQUIRE WHETHER - WHEN SUCH AVERAGE ATTENDANCE RESULT IN A WHOLE NUMBER AND A FRACTION, IN THIS INSTANCE 5.75 - THE FRACTION SHOULD BE DISREGARDED. THE REGULATION AND THE CITED NGB CIRCULAR DO NOT REQUIRE THAT FRACTIONS OBTAINED IN THE COMPUTATION BE DISREGARDED. THE LANGUAGE USED SEEMS TO REQUIRE THAT THE AVERAGE ATTENDANCE FIGURE BE USED EXACTLY AS COMPUTED. WHILE NO FRACTION WAS INVOLVED IN THE EXAMPLE USED IN THE NGB CIRCULAR, IT IS QUITE EVIDENT THAT FRACTIONS WOULD RESULT IN MOST OF SUCH CALCULATIONS; HENCE, IT IS REASONABLE TO ASSUME THAT ADEQUATE PROVISION WOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED THEREIN, HAD THERE BEEN ANY INTENT TO REDUCE OR INCREASE A FRACTION TO THE NEXT WHOLE DIGIT.

SINCE THE FRACTION IS NOT TO BE DISREGARDED, THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IN PARAGRAPH 4 OF YOUR LETTER IS IN THE NEGATIVE. PAYMENT ON THE SUBMITTED SUPPLEMENTAL PAYROLL, WHICH IS RETURNED HEREWITH, IS AUTHORIZED, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.

YOU ALSO INQUIRE WHETHER, IF THE ANSWER IS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, THE RULE WILL HAVE EQUAL APPLICATION TO NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY DRILLS. SINCE THE ANSWER IS IN THE NEGATIVE, AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS NOT REQUIRED.