is receiving two separate retirement payments understood two separate sources of a sort of statutory authority the st is his military retirement payment and that is paid out by the defense finance accounting service under the authority of title ten and that is for his service in the national guard on weekends and your field training and his active duty deployments he gets the benefit of the uniform services exception for that thing but he's also getting a  payment and that is his payment under the civil service retirement system that's paid out by the opposite personnel management under title five and that is for his civilian civil service employment as a dual status technician he does not get the benefit of the exception for that payment because the exception only it's five to a payment based wholly on service as a member of a uniform service as defined in section four ten a so a civil service retirement system payment is paid up by o p m only to civil servant people in the civil service under title five dollars title five defined civil service to exclude positions in the uniform service as babcock and can point out it would not actually have been possible for someone serving entirely as a member of uniformed service to get a service as a member of a uniform service because congress could have chosen other words there but as in this context means in the role of in the capacity of those two words  limit the scope of this exception so then you see that the the exception actually what's an example of what's being excluded well your honor i'm not aware of what is excluded if there were a a payment that was based it was based partially on services a member of uniform service i'm not aware of what that would be you know here  where we talk about how it is possible for the civil service under the civil service retirement system if let's say hypothetically someone was was working in the civil service and then they also were in the national guard or the army reserves you know part time and they were getting they would get a military pension but would be very small then there are certain circumstances where they can simply get credit for their military their time spent in the military and get that somehow added it's very complicated get it added so they get credit on the civil service side under the civil service retirement system there are a lot of limitations on it and the reason i gave is one is one reason why one would do it if you were going to get much of a military pension you might say well if i can add that time on the civilian side i'll get a bigger civilian pension and all i have to do was say i'm going to forego my military pension which wasn't much to begin with in that circumstance you are getting a civil service pension that is based in part on your military service i'm not sure i have been sufficiently this is a complicated aspect of this of the social security act but that would be one instance where holy would be doing work because that would be what i described would be a sort situation in which your pension would be based in part on military service now thanks to the couple ok none of that is actually what's going on here i mean here he worked you know he worked his weekends he served in the national guard and he carried out his active duty deployments and he was paid on military wage scale he got military retirement benefits and other military benefits and that was all under  thirty seven dollars covers paying allowances for the uniform services title ten covers the retired pay for the reserve components and then under title five he was working as a dual status technician during his workweek and what follows from the fact that he was a title five employees or all the other things that make up the civil service means that do is that a technician can join a union it means so that some aspect of their employ covered by a collective bargaining agreement it means that if they have to work additional hours they can get compensatory time off it means that if they get injured on the job they can get federal employee compensation actually or workers compensation and of course someone who is serving as a member of uniform service as in the national guard doesn't get any of that because what he's doing is under separate statutory authority another point that we make in our  you know little argues that there would be no prohibition in the law on getting civil service retirement benefits for serving as a member of your from service but in practice as we've appropriations cause and the purpose statute and that comes about because we're only supposed to spend money on the purposes for which is authorized one example would be a problem would be for someone like mr lynn would be if you could not for instance spend that money that was appropriated to on the civil service side to pay to a set of technicians to pay for a training requirement that he had in his role as a national guard service member and those types of training requirements are things like weapons training chemical warfare training think that requirements that they do a status technicians of course do not have because the different position is not a military position there has been some question raised by the plaintiff that he could in fact occupy more than one status at a time that he could be serving as a member of uniform service at the same time that he was working  the different sources of statutory authority they settled that question but also the supreme court said in the purpose case perpetrates a department of defense that you can only be in one status at a time way the court said it was someone who serve in the national guard to react in the cause of the civilian hach the state militia hat and the army or we would say in this case the air force hat but you can only wear one hat at a time only be in one status at a time so it would be helpful to the point for me to walk through the text which that cut court gave a particularly close really to that and i would do that i have about less than a minute left i think we understand these arguments and there's three circuits as you said that have also weighed in on this one question i had just as a practical matter how much hangs in the balance here depending on how we decide in terms of a four everyone hired from january one thousand and four dollars was covered as the social security act and of course when called provision only applies to a payment for non covered service so it's basically fifteen years of hiring and there's a limited number of tools that technicians but this is the period when more of them have been from that period are retiring and we are seeing a number of these cases but it is indeed a close group