exclusively available for salary payments, appear to involve no question as to the method under which showings of any savings on an annual basis, available for promotions within the meaning of the provision in question may be determined. (All of these employees hold Navy Department appointments and are compensated on a per annum basis.)

Similarly in the field service, the naval act carrying specific limitations for personal services of group IV (b)-per annum-employees, any savings which may be available for promotions are susceptible of showings to be computed in the same manner.

However, the great majority of the Navy's field service are per diem or per hour employees (groups I to IV (a), inclusive). As individuals, most of them are not paid directly from a specific appropriation; the distribution of the payments to the appropriations chargeable is determined through the cost accounting system according to the work performed. The various appropriations of the naval act are, in the main, made up on the basis of the work to be accomplished. For example, the appropriation "Engineering-1935", under which the sum of $15,542,000 is available for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1935, is specifically drawn for certain purposes:

"For repairs, preservation, and renewal of machinery, auxiliary machinery, and boilers of naval vessels, yard craft, and ships' boats, distilling and refrigerating apparatus; repairs, preservation, and renewals of electric interior and exterior signal communications and all electrical appliances of whatsoever nature on board naval vessels, except

*

*

Out of the $15,542,000 mentioned, the law provides that the sum to be paid for employees assigned to group IV (b) and those performing similar services carried under native and alien schedules in the Schedule of Wages for Civil Employees in the Field Service of the Navy Department shall not exceed $1,575,000. Other than this limitation, there is no restriction or division as to the availability of this appropriation for labor and for material. The appropriation is administered by the Bureau of Engineering, Navy Department, and that Bureau makes up its detailed allocations for work under its cognizance throughout the Navy, both ashore and afloat. Administratively, this Bureau estimates at the beginning of each fiscal year the amounts from the appropriation which will be required for the payment of labor (groups I to IV (a), inclusive) to accomplish the various projects, and from time to time during the year these estimates are revised. The amount available to any particular navy yard or naval station for labor and material under this appropriation varies from month to month according to the assignment of work, but for the appropriation as a whole, regardless of the particular yards or stations performing the work, the amount of labor required for the accomplishment of its purpose can be fairly accurately estimated. This applies equally to the othe appropriations for the Naval Establishment employing this class of labor. There can be no fixed number of groups I to IV (a) positions at any one activity, as employment under these groups is intermittent thereat according to the fluctuations of the work load and the amount of funds allotted by the Bureaus. It is, therefore, apparent that any showings of savings for the purpose of administrative promotions must be made by the Navy Department on the basis of the status of the appropriations for the Naval Establishment as a whole and not by the several field activities.

The per diem and per hour employees (groups I to IV (a), inclusive) are compensated at rates basically established by the current schedule of wages, each rating (except apprentices) carrying a maximum, intermediate, and minimum rate, the basic differential being 5 cents per hour. Advancements of an employee from the minimum rate to the intermediate or intermediate to the maximum, and an apprentice through his four classes, are regarded as administrative promotions. Therefore, in order to promote any employee of these groups the availability of funds for the purpose must be shown, and on an annual basis. Manifestly, under the administrative procedure necessary to comply with the terms of the naval act the showings as to savings on an annual basis cannot be made for per diem and per hour employees by the same method as for the departmental and group IV (b) field employees, as laid down in your decision of June 9, 1934.

Groups I, II, III, and IV (a) at present number over 47,000 employees: group IV (b) less than 10,000. It is not presumed that employees of groups I to IV (a), inclusive, are to be excluded from the benefits of the provisions of the act of March 28 relative to administrative promotions. For those per diem and per hour employees whose services are common to all appropriations for

work of the Naval Establishment, it is proposed to make the " showings of savings" from the apportionments for labor, other than group IV (b), under each appropriation, to be set up and recorded in advance by the various bureaus concerned from the funds available for the year for work under their cognizance. While it is understood that the availability of funds for administrative promotions must be considered on an annual basis, the amounts thereof will be subject to the changes in the apportionments made from time to time during the year necessitated to meet the constantly varying work loads. It is the intention that the "showings of savings" will be made in he Navy Department, since, as previously pointed out, the field activities will not have the information as to the total amounts of the administrative allocations under the several appropriations.

Information is requested as to whether the procedure above outlined may be adopted, and also whether, in any case in which the Navy Department should desire to grant administrative promotions on the annual savings basis, a certificate from this Department to the effect that the funds are available to cover the promotions granted in any given month will be acceptable to your office.

I see no legal objection at this time to the procedure proposed in your letter.

Administrative promotions should be designated on the first pay roll in the remarks column as A. P.

Amount on annual basis

and the certified statement of fact to appear on the pay roll or voucher on which administrative promotions are first made should, if the facts warrant, read substantially as follows:

It is hereby certified that sufficient savings are now available on an annual basis under the appropriation

Title and symbol number

to cover the aggregate amount of administrative promotions shown herein and that the aggregate amount of all existing commitments under said appropriation, including these promotions, when computed on an annual basis, does not exceed the total amount of said appropriation for the fiscal year.

In addition to the administrative certificate to be placed on the pay rolls and vouchers, there should be kept so as to be made readily available to this office, records and data showing at all times the condition of the personnel appropriations with respect to savings, commitments, etc.

(A-55935)

SALARIES-INCREASE-REALLOCATION

The prohibition against payment of increased compensation to any officer or employee by reason of the reallocation of his position since June 30, 1932, does not preclude payment to a new appointee to such reallocated position at the minimum salary of the grade in which classified by such reallocation.

Comptroller General McCarl to the Civil Service Commission, July 2, 1934: There has been received your letter of May 29, 1934, presenting for decision a question stated as follows:

In connection with certifying eligibles to fill a vacancy in the position of junior inspector of weights and measures, Sp-3, District of Columbia government, a question has arisen which may be generally expressed as follows:

7556°-35-2

What is the proper entrance salary for a new employee selected from one of the Commission's eligible lists to fill a vacancy under the Classification Act of 1923, as amended, where such vacancy has been caused by the resignation of an employee whose position was reallocated, within the meaning of section 3 of the Independent Offices Appropriation Act of June 16, 1933, or section 6 of the District of Columbia Appropriation Act of the same date (now section 24 (f), title II, of the act of March 28, 1934)? Is it the minimum salary of the grade to which the position was reallocated, less the deduction applicable to Government employees generally, or is the minimum salary of the grade from which it was reallocated, less such general deduction?

In other words, does the prohibition contained in section 24 (f) of the act of March 28, 1934, run against the employee occupying a position at the time it is reallocated, or does it run against the position itself regardless of who may occupy it from time to time?

Section 24 (f) of the act of March 28, 1934, 48 Stat. 523, provides: (f) No part of the appropriations made during the second session of the Seventy-third Congress shall be used to pay any increase in the salary of any officer or employee of the United States Government or the municipal government of the District of Columbia by reason of the reallocation of the position of such officer or employee to a higher grade after June 30, 1932, by the Personnel Classification Board or the Civil Service Commission, and salaries paid accordingly shall be payment in full.

A similar provision in section 3 of the act of June 16, 1933, 48 Stat. 304, was held by this office to require the reduction in the salary of an employee received by prior reallocation, but it was stated in that decision "it is to be understood, of course, that the statute does not require a reduction in the grade in which the position has been properly allocated." 13 Comp. Gen. 1. In a somewhat similar situation involving the prohibition against automatic promotions, it was held that, notwithstanding that increased postal receipts may have required the advancement of a post office from one class to another, the postmaster in office could not be paid any increased compensation, but that a new appointee would be entitled to the benefit of the higher rate and might be paid compensation accordingly. 12 Comp. Gen. 649.

The prohibition in section 24 (f) of the act of March 28, 1934, supra, is not against the reallocation of the position, but against the payment of any increase in the salary of any officer or employee by reason of such reallocation. Accordingly, where the reallocated position has become vacant, the payment initially to a new appointee of the minimum salary rate fixed under the classification act for the position as reallocated would not constitute any increase in the salary of such officer or employee and would not be prohibited by the statutory provision quoted. In other words, the inhibition of the statute runs against the employee occupying the position at time of its reallocation and not against the position.

(A-56028)

OCEAN MAIL CONTRACTS-DETERMINATION OF NAUTICAL MILEAGE BY THE POSTMASTER GENERAL-DELEGATION OF SUCH FUNCTION-AVAILABILITY OF TWO ROUTES OF UNEQUAL LENGTH Under the provisions of section 409 (d) of the Merchant Marine Act, 1928. 45 Stat. 695, the Postmaster General is charged with the duty of determining the number of nautical miles by the shortest practicable route between the ports covered by the contract and this function may not be delegated to a subordinate officer. The determination of nautical mileage under section 409 (d) of the cited act constitutes an "order" or "regulation" within the meaning of section 405, Revised Statutes, as amended, 42 Stat. 24, and, as such, is required to be certified to the General Accounting Office for use in the settlement of claims and accounts.

Where two routes are available between two ports, one longer than the other, and the Postmaster General certifies that the use of the longer route is made necessary for navigation purposes because of weather conditions rendering travel by the shorter route prohibitive from a navigation standpoint, such certification may be deemed as a determination that the longer route is the "shortest practicable route" within the meaning of section 409 (d) of the Merchant Marine Act, 1928. The use of either route should not be left at the option of the contractor as the statute is mandatory that the "shortest practicable route" be determined by the Postmaster General. Comptroller General McCarl to the Postmaster General, July 2, 1934:

Reference is made to three letters from the director, Division of International Postal Service, Office of the Second Assistant Postmaster General, one dated May 29, 1934, ref. no. 43156-Ws-p, the other two dated June 4, 1934, ref. 43127-Ws-p and 43128-Ws-p, forwarding for my consideration the requests for review of settlements made by this office in the cases of Lykes Bros.-Ripley Steamship Co., American Mail Line, and Dollar Steamship Lines, respectively, under their contracts covering services performed on routes nos. F.O.M. 57, 25, and 26, respectively-there having been deducted in each of the settlements a sum representing apparent excess mileage of 28 miles in the case of each vessel traveling between Shanghai and Hong Kong, through the use of the longer of two available routes between said points.

It is disclosed by the record that there are two available routes by which vessels leaving Shanghai may reach Hong Kong, namely, the route through "Bonham Straits" and the one outside "Saddle Group", the former route being 824 nautical miles and the latter 852 miles, or a difference of 28 miles. It appears further that the shorter route is used only when weather conditions permit, otherwise the longer route is used. Upon the facts now appearing of record, I have today given instructions for a revision of the settlements, allowing the three steamship companies involved here such additional amounts as may be found due as to such voyages where it was necessary to use the longer route. Hereafter settlements in these cases will be on the basis of a proper showing of facts as to the route actually used, and if the longer route was used, that weather conditions were such as to require its use.

In connection with this matter, there has been noted the manner in which information is being furnished this office with respect to the mileage on ocean mail routes. The practice followed appears to be (1) to request a statement from the Hydrographic Office of the Navy Department as to the nautical mileage involved between certain points, and (2) to forward a copy of such statement to this office by a notice or letter signed by the director of the International Postal Service, Office of the Second Assistant Postmaster General-such a notice apparently being intended as a determination of the mileage involved between ports for the purpose of computing the amounts due the contractors for the carrying of ocean mail. Section 409 (d) of the Merchant Marine Act, 1928, 45 Stat. 695, provides as follows:

The Postmaster General shall determine the number of nautical miles by the shortest practicable route between the ports involved and payments under any contract made under this title shall be made for such number of miles on each outward voyage regardless of actual mileage traveled.

Section 405, Revised Statutes, as modified by the act of June 10, 1921, 42 Stat. 24, provides as follows:

All orders and regulations of the Postmaster General which may originate a claim, or in any manner affect the accounts of the Postal Service, shall be certified to the General Accounting Office.

Under the provisions of the Merchant Marine Act, quoted above, the Postmaster General is required to determine the number of nautical miles by the shortest practicable route between the ports involved, and there is nothing in the law authorizing the delegation of such function to a subordinate officer. Also, the determination of nautical mileage made pursuant to the statute constitutes an "order" or “regulation" which "affects the accounts of the Postal Service" within contemplation of the last-quoted statute, and, as such, should" be certified to the General Accounting Office."

In order, therefore, to comply with the two provisions of the statutes, supra, it is requested that hereafter the mileage data required for computation of compensation for services in connection with ocean mail contracts be certified to this office on journals of the Postmaster General instead of in the manner in which such information is now being furnished as stated above. Where, as in the instant matter, there may be two routes available between two ports-each differing in the number of miles—and the longer route is employed by a contractor, there should be furnished a report of facts why such longer route was used and whether, under the conditions which may be made to appear, you find the route so employed as being the shortest practicable route within contemplation of the statute. In no event should the use of either route in such cases be left at the option of the contractor-the statute in this connection being mandatory that payment be made on the basis of the "shortest practicable route" as determined by the Postmaster General.