B-121690, MARCH 30, 1955, 34 COMP. GEN. 483

B-121690, MARCH 30, 1955, 34 COMP. GEN. 483

GRATUITIES - REENLISTMENT BONUS - COMPUTATION REENLISTMENTS IN THE UNIFORMED SERVICES AFTER OCTOBER 1, 1949, FOR WHICH MEMBERS RECEIVED ENLISTMENT ALLOWANCES IN LIEU OF REENLISTMENT BONUSES UNDER THE SAVINGS PROVISION IN SECTION 207 (D) OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949 MUST BE INCLUDED IN DETERMINING THE NUMBER OF REENLISTMENTS FOR BONUS COMPUTATION PURPOSES UNDER SECTION 208 OF SAID ACT.

ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL WEITZEL TO THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, MARCH 30, 1955:

IT HAS COME TO OUR ATTENTION, AS A RESULT OF THE AUDIT OF THE PAY RECORDS OF MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES, THAT REENLISTMENT BONUS PAYMENTS ARE BEING MADE UNDER REGULATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS WHICH WE DO NOT CONSIDER TO BE IN CONFORMITY WITH SECTION 208 OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949, AS ADDED BY SECTION 2 OF THE ACT OF JULY 16, 1954, 68 STAT. 488.

SUCH SECTION 208 CONTAINS A TABLE WHICH PROVIDES FOR A RELATIVELY LARGE REENLISTMENT BONUS FOR A MEMBER'S FIRST REENLISTMENT, WITH SUBSTANTIALLY DECREASING REENLISTMENT BONUS PAYMENTS FOR THE SECOND, THIRD, AND FOURTH REENLISTMENTS. A FOOTNOTE TO THE TABLE, HOWEVER, PROVIDES THAT, IN DETERMINING THE NUMBER OF A REENLISTMENT," ANY REENLISTMENT WHEN A BONUS WAS NOT AUTHORIZED IS NOT COUNTED.'

IN THE ISSUANCE OF REGULATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF SECTION 208, THE DEPARTMENTS OF THE ARMY, NAVY, AND AIR FORCE HAVE INTERPRETED AND APPLIED SUCH FOOTNOTE AS EXCLUDING REENLISTMENTS ENTERED INTO AFTER OCTOBER 1, 1949, FOR WHICH NO "REENLISTMENT BONUS" WAS PAID BUT FOR WHICH, IN LIEU OF SUCH BONUS, THERE WAS PAID (UNDER THE SAVINGS PROVISION IN SECTION 207 (D) OF THE CAREER COMPENSATION ACT OF 1949, 63 STAT. 812), A LARGER AMOUNT COMPUTED UNDER LAWS IN EFFECT PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1, 1949, AUTHORIZING AN "ENLISTMENT ALLOWANCE" RATHER THAN A ,REENLISTMENT BONUS.' SEE PARAGRAPH B, ARMY REGULATIONS NO. 35-1525, JULY 26, 1954; PARAGRAPH 1044075-1A, NAVY COMPTROLLER MANUAL (CH. 34); AND PAGE 6, AIR FORCE FINANCE TECHNICAL DIGEST, JULY 30, 1954.

THE FOOTNOTE SAYS "WHEN" A BONUS WAS NOT AUTHORIZED, AND IT IS OUR VIEW THAT THE ONLY REENLISTMENTS EXCLUDED BY THE FOOTNOTE ARE THOSE ENTERED INTO PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1, 1949, WHEN THERE WAS NO STATUTORY PROVISION FOR PAYMENT OF ANY "REENLISTMENT BONUS," AS SUCH, IN ANY CASE, THE PAYMENTS THEN AUTHORIZED TO STIMULATE REENLISTMENTS BEING TERMED "ENLISTMENT ALLOWANCES.' SEE DECISION OF MARCH 23, 1955, 34 COMP. GEN. 463, TO SECOND LIEUTENANT W. C. FEDERHART, USAF, DEPUTY FINANCE OFFICER.

IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS VIEW ACCORDS WITH BOTH THE LETTER AND THE SPIRIT OF SECTION 208 AND THAT THE PHRASE "WHEN A BONUS WAS NOT AUTHORIZED" CAN HAVE A REASONABLY SENSIBLE APPLICATION ONLY IF INTERPRETED AS HAVING GENERAL REFERENCE TO THE TIME (PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1, 1949) WHEN THERE WAS NO STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR PAYMENT, IN ANY CASE, OF AN ITEM TERMED A "REENLISTMENT BONUS.' IN OTHER WORDS, WE HAVE CONCLUDED THAT IT WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THE INTENT OF THE CONGRESS IN ENACTING SECTION 208 TO HOLD THAT, IN CURRENTLY COMPUTING A REENLISTMENT BONUS UNDER SUCH SECTION, THERE SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM CONSIDERATION ANY REENLISTMENT AFTER OCTOBER 1, 1949, WHICH WAS REWARDED BY AN "ENLISTMENT ALLOWANCE" IN LIEU OF A "REENLISTMENT BONUS" WHEN THE SOLE REASON WHY A ,REENLISTMENT BONUS," AS SUCH, WAS NOT PAID WAS THAT THE "ENLISTMENT ALLOWANCE" (COMPUTED UNDER A SAVINGS CLAUSE ON THE BASIS OF SUPERSEDED LAWS) WAS GREATER IN AMOUNT THAN THE "REENLISTMENT BONUS" WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PARTICULAR CASE INVOLVED.

THE CASE OF TECHNICAL SERGEANT RICHARD GOWER, AF 19189025, IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE CASES WHICH HAVE COME TO ATTENTION INVOLVING PAYMENTS MADE UNDER THE ABOVE-CITED REGULATIONS. MILITARY PAY ORDER NO. 58, OF THE 3275TH INSTALLATION SQUADRON, PARKS AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA, INDICATES THAT SERGEANT GOWER WAS DISCHARGED ON AUGUST 25, 1954, AND REENLISTED ON AUGUST 26, 1954, AND IT CONTAINS A STATEMENT SIGNED BY SERGEANT GOWER TO THE EFFECT THAT HE HAS RECEIVED NO REENLISTMENT BONUS. SUCH ORDER APPARENTLY WAS ACCEPTED AS PROVIDING A BASIS FOR CREDITING SERGEANT GOWER, ON AUGUST 26, 1954, WITH A REENLISTMENT BONUS COMPUTED FOR A "FIRST REENLISTMENT" NOTWITHSTANDING THAT HE HAD PREVIOUSLY REENLISTED ON MARCH 4, 1952, FOR THREE YEARS AND AT THAT TIME WAS PAID AN ENLISTMENT ALLOWANCE OF $150 IN LIEU OF A REENLISTMENT BONUS OF $90. THE FACT THAT HE GOT MORE THAN THE BONUS IN 1952 SHOULD NOT PROVIDE A BASIS TO DISREGARD THAT REENLISTMENT AND PAY HIM A FURTHER INCREASE IN 1954. FOR THESE REASONS, IT IS OUR VIEW THAT SERGEANT GOWER'S REENLISTMENT OF AUGUST 26, 1954, MUST BE CONSIDERED A SECOND REENLISTMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE ABOVE-CITED SECTION 208.

ACCORDINGLY, INSTRUCTIONS ARE BEING ISSUED TO WITHHOLD CREDIT IN DISBURSING OFFICERS' ACCOUNTS FOR ANY AMOUNTS PAID AS REENLISTMENT BONUS WHICH EXCEED THE AUTHORIZED AMOUNTS COMPUTED ON THE PROPER BASIS AS SET FORTH ABOVE.