IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 October 2022 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220001878 APPLICANT REQUESTS: in effect, * waiver of the mandatory retirement date (MRD) * retroactive retirement due to age * personal appearance before the Board via video or telephone APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * DD Form 149 Online Application * Legal Opinion * Email Medical Officers Age Limits and Retirement Eligibility * USAREC Form 1282 (U.S. Army Active Duty Incentives Declaration Statement for Dental Corps, Medical Corps * Email Age Limit and Retirement Eligibility * 2016 Emails with Personnel * DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) Deferment of MRD * 3 x DA Forms 67-10-3 (Strategic Grade Plate Officer Evaluation Report) * Memorandum MRD Extension * Memorandum from Manpower and Reserve Affairs MRD Extension * Request for Health Professions Officer Retention Bonus * Request for Health Professions Officer Incentive Pay * Army Active Component Health Professions Officer Special Incentive Pay Plan * Memorandum Request for Voluntary Retirement * Email String S-1 with the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) * Memorandum to HRC, Inspector General (IG) * HRC IG Response * Officer Record Brief * Letter from Attorney to HRC * Memorandum from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense FACTS: 1. The applicant states, in effect: a. At the time of his initial appointment as a Medical Corps (MC) Officer, and continuing until 26 December 2019, the U.S. Army granted waivers that enabled accession into the Medial, Dental, and Chaplain Corps for people beyond the standard maximum age of 48, and provided retirement benefits, such as healthcare and pension to those officers, if they served until their MRD, as stated in Title 10 United States Code (USC), section 1251. b. On 26 December 2019, the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness directed all services to stop processing retirement actions under Title 10, USC, section 1251 for any officer who had less than 20 years of creditable service. This policy was subsequently signed into law effective January 2021 as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) without a grandfathering clause to address Soldiers who entered under the prior regulation. c. This decision applied to his retirement status and was made unilaterally after he was under contract for over eight years, and more specifically, after he requested and received an MRD extension and signed a four-year retention bonus. The retention bonus was predicated on approval of the MRD extension of 2 years and 7 months, which extended his MRD from 31 January 2020 to 31 August 2022. d. The Department of Defense (DOD), Army , and HRC made no attempt to inform him of this change, which was a direct contradiction to guidance provided to him by HRC and contrary to regulations that were in place for decades. e. He signed an extension and then a retention bonus contract based on guidance received from HRC that he would receive health care and a prorated defined benefit upon working to his MRD. The memorandum from The Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, which was then enacted into law when Congress subsequently amended Title 10, USC, section 1251 as part of the fiscal year (FY) 2021 NDAA, unilaterally changed the basis of the regulations/code/contract, which he was led to believe was a foundation for his retirement. At no time was he ever informed of the change by HRC, DOD, his personnel office, or the garrison transition office. f. There are likely several hundred other Chaplain, Dental, and Medical Corps officers, in addition to him, who are being subjected to this unilateral decision by the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and the ex post facto application of the decision and its subsequent incorporation in the FY21 NDAA. 2. The applicant's service records contain the following documents for the Board's consideration: a. Orders Number 29-1-A-049, published by HRC, dated 17 May 2010, appointed the applicant in the Regular Army in the MC in the rank/grade of lieutenant colonel (LTC)/O-5. b. Orders Number A-05-015943, published by HRC, dated 27 May 2010 ordered the applicant to active duty in an indefinite status with a report date of 15 July 2010. c. An American Board of Family Medicine Certificate, which states the applicant is a Diplomate of this Board and having met its continuing requirements is hereby recertified as a Diplomate 2005 to 2012. d. An American Board of Family Medicine verification, which shows the applicant was certified in family medicine with the following certification history: * certified 10 July 1987 to 8 July 1993 * recertified 9 July 1993 to 8 July 1999 * recertified 9 July 1999 to 20 July 2005 * recertified 21 July 2005 to 31 December 2012 e. DA Form 1506 (Statement of Service - For Computation of Length of Service for Pay Purposes), dated 15 July 2010, which shows the applicant entered active duty on 28 June 2010. His basic active service date, pay entry basic date, and date of rank were 28 June 2010. f. The applicant completed Requests for Medical Additional Special pay on: * 17 August 2010 * 4 April 2011 * 23 May 2012 * 18 March 2013 * 29 April 2015 * 22 April 2016 g. The applicant completed Requests for Medical Corps Incentive Special Pay on: * 17 August 2010 * 17 May 2011 * 23 May 2012 * 18 March 2013 * 30 May 2017 h. Orders Number 262-005, published by HRC, dated 19 September 2017, promoted the applicant to the rank/grade of colonel (COL)/O-5, effective on with a date of rank of 1 October 2017. i. On 5 November 2018, the Assistant Secretary of the Army, Manpower and Reserve Affairs approved the applicant's request for deferral of his MRD until 31 August 2022. j. On 17 December 2018, the applicant completed a Request for Health Professions Officer Retention Bonus and Request for HPOIP and was subsequently approved for both. His Health Professions Officer Retention Bonus was for four-years at a rate of $38,000.00 per year, effective 15 July 2018. k. On 31 August 2022, the applicant was issued a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), showing he was honorably discharged and completed 12 years, 1 month, and 16 days of net active service. He was 64 years of age, at the time of his retirement. He was discharged for maximum age. 3. The applicant provides the following documents for the Board's review: a. A legal opinion regarding retirement eligibility, dated 22 August 1994, which states in effect: (1) Title 10, USC, section 1251 mandates that Regular Army officers will be retired for age upon reaching age 62. Title 10 USC 532(d) deletes, for medical and dental officers among others, the requirement in Title 10 USC, section 532(a)(2) that officers be able to complete 20 years of active commissioned service before their fifty-fifth birthday. Accordingly, there is no age limitation for appointment of these officers and such officers may be retired under Title 10, USC, section 1251, when they reach age 62, before completion of 20 years of service. (2) An officer's pre-Defense Officer Personnel Management Act (DOPMA) versus post-DOPMA status is relevant in this inquiry only in the computation of retirement pay. If Regular Army officers required to be retired under Title 10, USC, section 1251 were on active duty on the effective date of DOPMA (15 September 1981), their retirement will be 50 percent of the base pay upon which their retirement pay is based. Regular Army officers who entered active duty after the effective date of DOPMA would be entitled to retirement pay computed under Title 10, USC, section 1401, which is equal to two and one-half percent for each year of service times the base pay upon which their retirement is based. (3) Insofar as the opinion addresses entitlement to retired pay, it is advisory only, as such determinations may only be properly made by fiscal officers of the government or the Federal courts. b. An email from a civilian at the U.S. Army Recruiting Command, dated 3 December 2008, which states, in effect: (1) The civilian was asked to send a LTC information regarding an issue they ran into at the Medical Recruiting Brigade (MRB). The question was whether an applicant for a Regular Army medical or dental officer commission, who was older than 42, needed an Assistant Secretary of the Army (ASA) waiver. The MRB was being told by Department of the Army G-1 that an ASA waiver was required; however, two prior opinions from the Office of The Judge Advocate General (OTJAG) indicated the waiver was not required. (2) Paragraph 1-9 of Army Regulation (AR) 601-100 (Appointment of Commissioned and Warrant Officers in the Regular Army) stated: "An original appointment in the Regular Army may be given only to a person who is able to complete 20 years of active commissioned service before the person's 62nd birthday. A person receiving an original appointment to the Medical Corps, Dental Corps, or as a Chaplain was not subject to this age requirement. A reserve commissioned officer receiving a new original appointment in the Regular Army to the Army Nurse Corps, Medical Specialist Corps, Medical Service Corps, or Veterinary Corps were not subject to this age requirement. (3) Department of the Army G-1 was aware of the age requirements and the Medical/Dental Corps exception spelled out in paragraph 1-0 of AR 601-100. As indicated in an email, a LTC at G-1 agreed that "there was no [entry] age limit for medical [personnel]" and G-1 (correctly) noted that the ASA must give a waiver for a medical person to serve past the age of 62 years old." However, G-1 then (they thought incorrectly) concluded that medical personnel "must have an ASA waiver to come in after 42 years of age into the Regular Army." The opinions from OTJAG indicated that G-1's conclusion was incorrect. (4) The confusion on this issue might be related to eligibility for retirement pay. Apparently, Regular Army officers in the Medica/Dental Corps do not need 20 years of service to be eligible for retirement pay. It seemed that retirement pay for a Regular Army medical/dental officers who entered the service after 15 September 1981 were equal to 2.5 percent for each year of service multiplied by the individual's ("high three") base pay. If that was correct, then it would seem that an individual could be commissioned as a medical/dental officer at age 50, serve for 12 years, then retire at the mandatory retirement age of 62 and receive retirement pay (equal to 30 percent of base pay) based on the 12 years of service. No waivers/deferrals would be required. (5) The time and effort required to obtain an ASA age waiver was enormous and had a significant negative impact on the Medical Brigade's ability to complete its mission. Thus, it was essential to determine whether the waivers requested by G-1 were, in fact, required by law. (6) The reply to the email was not available for the Board's review. c. A USAREC Form 1282 dated 12 November 2009, shows the applicant accepted an Accession Bonus in the amount of $252,000.00 for incurring an active duty service obligation of 4 years. He declined the Accession Health Professional Loan Repayment Program and was not eligible for the Accession Bonus and Health Professions Loan Repayment Program. d. An email dated 25 November 2013, which states they were aware of the medical command's unique retirement statuses. The military brings on the officer to fill gaps for a special skill knowing ahead of time that they will not be able to serve 20 years before the mandatory retirement age of 62. With that being said, it was no fault of the officers that they could not stay past 62 years of age, so they are allowed to retire at that age with a pro rated retirement scale. e. A document entitled 2016 Emails with Personnel, which state, in effect: (1) An undated email from the Army Medical Department (AMEDD) Special Pay Branch, which states the applicant would have to discuss his MRD with his assignment manager at HRC. (2) An email from the applicant, dated 19 May 2017, to the AMEDD Special Pay Branch, asking for a point of contact to discuss his MRD. (3) An email from AMEDD Special Pay Branch, dated 19 May 2017, stating an agreement could not extend beyond a legislated mandatory separation or retirement date for age or service, unless deferred in advance of the agreement effective date. The applicant was eligible to: (a) Remain in his current MASP contract that expired on 14 July 2018 and he would receive his last payment of $38,000.00 on/or about 15 July 2017. Due to the MRD of 3 January 2020, he would not have enough time left on active duty to sign another multi-year contract. (b) Sign the HPOIP for $43,000.00/year prorated monthly, which was a continuous contract and would terminate the day he was released from active duty. (c) Align the MSP to the HPOIP and sign a 2-year HPOIP contract effective 15 July 2017 through 14 July 2019 at the rate of $17,000.00/year for a total of $34,000 due to MRD of 3 January 2020 he would not have enough time left on active duty to sign another multi-year contract (4) An email from the applicant to AMEDD Special Pay Branch, dated 19 May 2017 stating given the frequency with which physicians are able to obtain extensions, that hardly seemed appropriate. It resulted in a sizable pay cut. (5) An email from AMEDD Special Pay Branch, dated 19 May 2017, stating the system would not all the applicant to enter any contract that was beyond the MRD. If aligning, he would only be able to generate a 2-year HPORB contract. (6) An email from a Human Resource Technician, dated 19 May 2017 stating she went into the Medical Operational Data System (MODS) to point out his contracts and the system was stating he had an MRD of 3 January 2020. When they sat down and talked about his contracts, she was not aware of his MRD. He explained to her that he wanted to go out until 14 July 2021 with his contract. She was unable to complete his request. She would reach out to the Office of the Surgeon General (OTSG). Once she spoke with them, she would send the applicant another email. (7) An email from a COL at HRC, dated 19 May 2017, which states the applicant would need to formally request an MRD extension. The COL would predict it would be approved. If approved, the applicant is still eligible for special pay. Unfortunately, the earliest he could request an extension was 18 months prior to his MRD. The COL was not sure how that impacted his special pay options. (8) An email from the applicant to the COL at HRC, dated 19 May 2017, stating he wanted to add it was his intent to work until age 63 or 64; not age 62. He understood that 62 was the MRD, but he thought given the shortage of family physicians and his physical ability to serve, he could receive an exception to policy/waiver to continue to serve. May that was naive, and he did understand the doctrine, but doctrine was not rigid and he would like to see if there was a way forward. (9) An email from the applicant to the COL at HRC, dated 19 May 2017, stating the applicant apologized for the imposition but he would appreciate a point of contact at HRC that he could speak with regarding his MRD. He was effectively being told he could not sign for a retention bonus taking him beyond age 62. In other words, he needed to have his current one expire in 2018 and then sign a two year retention bonus in 2018, which was a $21,000.00 pay cut and effectively a no go. Perhaps that was just the way it was, but if not, then he would like to make sure this did not happen. Again, he did not want the COL to spend a lot of his time on it, but he hoped the COL knew a person that could work with the applicant. f. DA Form 4187 dated 29 August 2017, wherein the request was for the applicant's duty status be changed from active to retired effective 1200 hours 3 January 2020. He further was requesting retirement deferment of his MRD due to age. He requested his MRD be deferred until the age of 64. His current MRD was 3 January 2020, and he requested a deferred retirement date of 3 January 2022. The nature of his work was not affected by his age. He would continue to work in patient care if the deferment was granted. The form was unsigned. g. DA Form 67-10-3 for the period of 1 August 2017 to 14 May 2018, which shows he was evaluated as a Family Medicine Chief. The complete OER is available for the Board's review. h. Self-authored memorandum dated 5 November 2018 requesting an extension of his MRD to 31 August 2022. i. DA Form 67-10-3 for the period of 15 August 2018 through 14 May 2019, which shows he was recommended to be retained as a COL and he was rated as the Chief, Department of Family Medicine. The complete OER is available for the Board's review. j. Army Active Component Health Professions Officer (HPO) Special and Incentive Pay Plan, effective 1 January 2021, showing AMEDD special pay entitlements. The applicant wanted to draw the Board's attention to the follow: (1) Paragraph 3b: All HPOs must possess a current, valid unrestricted license from a State, U.S. Commonwealth, or territory, or an approved waiver or exemption if a HCP. An approved waiver or exemption must be consistent with regulation. (2) Paragraph 3b(3): Dietitians are exempt from maintaining a license from a particular jurisdiction. The authorizing document to practice is a national registration in accordance with regulation. Dietitians must posses the credentials of "Registered Dietitian/Registered Dietitian Nutritionist" per the Commission of Dietetic Registration. State licensure is an option, but not a requirement. (3) Paragraph 7a(3): If a Health Care Provider (HCP), Active Component and Active Guard/Reserve HPOs must be currently credentialed, privileged, and practicing a minimum of 40 hours/year at a facility designated by the Army, in the specialty for which the IP is being paid. Note: The Regulatory Compliance Branch AMEDD Quality and Safety Center, U.S. Army Medical Command indicates those in specialty training programs are not privileged providers under regulatory guidance. In turn, HCP is defined as those "granted privileges", therefore, those in training programs are not HCPs for the purpose of the IP and can execute the agreement without privileges. This also applies to all Veterinarians, which are not defined as a HCP or privileged. (4) Paragraph 7c(4): Termination of a current IP agreement can only be performed in conjunction with meeting the eligibility for a new higher rate IP, entering a rate specific training program or when linking IP with a multi-year retention bonus agreement. (5) Paragraph 7d: The annual IP agreement and rate will not expire unless the officer no longer meets the eligibility criteria. It is the HPO's responsibility to inform their Command and the AMEDD Special Pay Branch, OTSG to initiate stop-payment and recoupment action upon loss of eligibility, loss of license, or other pertinent disqualifying information. Payments received during the ineligible period will be recouped. (6) Paragraph 7e: The IP will be terminated upon separation from Active Duty, death, or if conditions of this agreement are not fulfilled. Reasons for termination include, but are not limited to: loss of privileges, court-martial conviction, violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, failure to maintain required certification or licensure, unprofessional conduct, failure to demonstrate proficient medical skill, or reasons that are in the best interest of the Army. The Army Surgeon General is the termination authority for all agreements. (7) Paragraph 8 (Health Professions Officer Retention Bonus) a(6): Officer must not be in a two-time non-selection status for promotion with the following exceptions officer in the grade of O-5 or O-6 may only execute the retention bonus for an obligation that does not extend past their MRD and at the time of the agreement effective date, the HPO must have no Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions and have passed the Army Physical Fitness Test/Army Combat Fitness Test and Army Body Composition Program standards within seven months and will continue to meet the standards for the length of the agreement period. The applicant made the comment "I was allowed to execute an RB through being authorized an extension of my MRD." (8) Paragraph (8)(a): The multi-year retention bonus is available to all designated specialty Army Nurse Corps (ANC) officers in the grade of O-5 and below. ANC officers in the grade of O-5/P and above are only authorized to execute a 2 or 3 year retention bonus agreement. Exception ANC officers in the grade of O-5/P and above in AOC 66F, 66P, or 66R may execute a 2, 3, 4, or 6 year retention bonus agreement. (9) Paragraph 8b (Procedures) (1): Annual payment amounts for the multi-year retention bonus agreements shall be in the amounts established in the pertinent section of Table 3. Payments will be made upon agreement effective date and annually thereafter on the anniversary of the agreement effective date, subject to the availability of funds. Any previous payments of retention bonus multi-year special pays will be stopped, and any overlapping payments will be adjusted and recouped as necessary. (10) Paragraph 8b(3): If entering a retention bonus agreement, the HPO shall also enter a new IP agreement for the same specialty at the linked IP rate listed in conjunction with the multi-year retention bonus. The HPO will continue IP eligibility at the rate for each active year of the multi-year retention bonus agreement. (11) Paragraph 9 (Automatic Voluntary Retention) a: Participation in the HPO Special and Incentive Pay Plan constitutes a voluntary retention program. Unless a waiver is obtained, an HPO participating in these special pays will not be released from Active Duty before fulfilling the term of continuous Active Duty agreed to by execution of an agreement, even if that Active Duty Obligation will extend the HPO beyond 20 years of active federal service. Requests for resignation, release from Active Duty, or voluntary retirement will be disapproved except when considered to be in the best interest of the Army. An offer to repay the full sum of special pays does not constitute a basis for early termination of an agreement. The applicant made the following comment, "If in the interest of the Army, it was not best to release me from the contract, I would not have been released." (12) Paragraph 9b: An agreement may not extend beyond a legislated mandatory separation or retirement date for age or service, unless the HPO's separation or retirement has been deferred in advance of the agreement effective date. An agreement executed without prior deferment is erroneous and subject to full recoupment. The applicant made the following comment: "Deferment was granted and this was prior to the unilateral change of policy." (13) Paragraph 14 (Payment Procedures) a: The BCP and IP shall be paid on a prorated monthly basis. The retention bonus shall be pain in annual installments for the length of the agreement and Accession Bonus/Critical Short Wartime Specialty Accession Bonus may be paid in a lump sum or annual installments as determined by the agreement amount or officer's request. The total amount paid under the agreement shall be fixed during the length of the agreement if disbursed annually. (14) Table 1: Specialties authorized the Accession Bonus or Critically Short Wartime Specialty Accession Bonus by USAREC must be in accordance with the current Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1, Army Accession Mission Memorandum. The applicant made the following comment: "This is what I was offered in 2010." (15) Table 3: Medical Corps HPO IP and HPO RB Rates. The applicant highlighted the following: Dental Corps HPO IP and HPO RB Rates: Nurse Corps HPO IP and HPO RB Rates: Specialty HPO IP and HPO RB Rates: k. A DA Form 67-10-3 for the period of 2 June 2020 through 1 June 2021, which shows it was recommended the applicant be retained as a COL. The entire OER is available for the Board's review. l. Memorandum from the applicant subject: Request for Voluntary Retirement, dated 12 July 2021, wherein the applicant requested retirement on 31 August 2022. m. An Email string S1 with HRC, which states in effect: (1) An undated email from the applicant stating thank you for the response. He would look forward to communicating with Mr. the following week. He fully understood that the DOD executes congressional mandates; but reneging on existing contracts is not something that is typically done. He made a decision to remain in the military that was predicated on receiving these benefits in retirement. (2) An email from the Deputy Chief, Officer Retirement and Separation, dated 7 October 2021, which added the author's supervisor to the email. He further stated to clarify it was not DOD that made this change, it was Congress. (3) An email from the applicant to the Deputy Chief, stating he did not accept the chief's answer and asked that he please refer the applicant to his supervisor. The DOD rescinding on a contract at the 11th hour of an officer's time in service and telling them "oh well, too bad, so sad", was not acceptable to the applicant. Retrospectively applying a new statute is clearly not fair or the right thing to do, and the applicant doubted this was the intent of the law. Needless to say, he was not going to let this go as he was promised at multiple times during his service, that these benefits were entitled upon retirement. (4) An email from the Chief to the applicant, dated 7 October 2021, stating he understood the applicant's situation; however, the change in law by Congress did not provide any exclusion or grandfather clause. Unless Congress goes back and amends the law to allow officers currently serving are allowed to continue and retire under the contract they signed there is nothing the Chief could to to allow the applicant to retire. There were changes to many laws that did not involve any grandfathering of officers that are currently serving. At that point, there was nothing that HRC could do to allow the applicant to submit for them to approve a retirement application. (5) From the applicant to the Chief, dated 7 October 2001, stating as someone who was never informed by any member of the Army/DoD regarding a change in benefits for retirees in his status, he found it difficult to believe this should be applied retrospectively to him since that was not the contract on which he entered. He hasn't sought legal counsel, but it seemed inappropriate to apply changes such as this under such circumstances. He could see it applied to people who enter the service subsequently, but not applying it to someone who did not commission under this rule/law. That is a retrospective application of the statute. At the time of his commission, and again in 2016 and 2012, he was told he qualified for these benefits if he worked until retirement age, which he did. No one in HRC or the DoD informed him in 2018, when he was offered the extension to his retirement that any rule had changed. (6) The entire email string is available for the Board's review in the supporting documents. n. A self-authored memorandum to the DOD IG, dated 8 October 2021, wherein the applicant disputes his mandatory retirement and presents issues already previously discussed in the record of proceedings. o. An email from HRC, IG, dated 28 October 2021, wherein the IG informs the applicant of HRC's response as it applies to his MRD with supporting Army regulations and law. p. Officer Record Brief dated 21 November 2021, which shows a record of his service to include duty assignments, military schools, promotions, and awards and recommendations. q. A memorandum from the applicant's attorney to the Command Judge Advocate, HRC, dated 6 April 2022, wherein counsel disputes the law and current policy which precludes the applicant from retiring. r. The attorney provides documents previously submitted by the applicant for the Board's consideration. In addition, he provided an information paper, which explained how Medical Corps and Dental Corps officers could retire without 20 years of Active Federal Service and the memorandum from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, dated 25 December 2019, directing the services to stop processing retirements for individuals who had not completed 20 years of Active Federal Service. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant's request for a personal appearance was carefully considered. In this case, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision. As a result, a personal appearance before the Board is not necessary to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case. 2. After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board determined that relief was warranted. The Board carefully considered applicant’s contentions, military record and applicable regulatory guidance. The Board agreed that the applicant requested a Mandatory Retirement Date extension and signed a four-year retention bonus. The Board concurred that the applicant moved forward in good faith by signing the bonus based on information that the Human Resource Command provided. Evidence of record is void information showing that he was otherwise not eligible for retention or the bonus. However, through no fault of his own, he was involuntarily separated. Based on the preponderance of documentation available for review the Board determined that relief was warranted. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 :X :X :X GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected to show: * he was retained in service until he reached the age of 64 and subsequently retired effective 31 August 2022 * he is entitled to to all back pay and allowances effective the date of promotion, the amount of which to be determined by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service. I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): N/A REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, section 1251, in effect at the time of the applicant's accession, stated unless retired or separated earlier, each regular commissioned officer serving in a grade below brigadier general shall be retired on the first day of the month following the month in which the officer becomes 62 years of age. a. Deferred retirement of Health Professions Officers. The Secretary of the military department concerned may defer the retirement of a health professions officer if during the period of the deferment the officer will be performing duties consisting primarily of providing patient care or performing other clinical duties. b. A health professions office is a medical officer. c. The Secretary of the military department concerned may extend a deferment beyond the 62nd birthday if the Secretary determines that extension of the deferment is necessary for the needs of the military department concerned. Such an extension shall be made on a case-by-case basis and shall be for such period as the Secretary considers appropriate. 2. Title 10, USC, section 1251, as amended, states unless retired or separated earlier, each regular commissioned officer serving in a grade below brigadier general shall be retired or separated on the first day of the month following the month in which the officer becomes 62 years of age. a. Deferred retirement or separation of health professions officers. The Secretary of the military department concerned may defer the retirement or separation of a health profession officer if during the period of the deferment the officer will be performing duties consisting primarily of providing patient care or performing other clinical duties. b. Retirement or separation based on years of creditable service. If the officer has at least 6 years but fewer than 20 years of creditable service, the officer shall be separated with separation pay. If the officer has fewer than 6 years creditable service, the officer shall be separated. c. In the case of a regular commissioned officer who was added to the retired list before the date of the enactment of the Fiscal Year 2021 the officer shall be retired. 3. Title 10, USC, section 7311 (Twenty years or more: Regular or Reserve commissioned officers) states the Secretary of the Army may, upon the officer’s request, retire a regular or reserve commissioned officer of the Army who has at least 20 years of service computed under section 7326 of this title, at least 10 years of which have been active service as a commissioned officer. The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of the Army, during the period specified in paragraph (2), to reduce the requirement under subsection (a) for at least 10 years of active service as a commissioned officer to a period (determined by the Secretary of the Army) of not less than eight years. The period specified in this paragraph is the period beginning on 7 January 2011, and ending on 30 September 2018. 4. Title 10, USC, section 1406 (Retired base pay for members who first became members before 8 September 1980: final basic pay) states the retired pay or retainer pay of any person entitled to that pay who first became a member of a uniformed service before 8 September 1980, is computed using the retired pay base or retainer pay base determined under this section. Under section 1251 compute at rates applicable on date of retirement. 5. Title 10, USC, section 1407 (Retired base pay for members who first became members after 7 September 1980: high – 36 month average) states the retired pay or retainer pay of any person entitled to that pay who first became a member of a uniformed service after 7 September 1980, is computed using the retired pay base or retainer pay base determined under this section. The total amount of monthly basic pay to which the member was entitled for the 36 months (whether or not consecutive) out of all the months of active service of the member for which the monthly basic pay to which the member was entitled was the highest, divided by 36. 6. Title 10, USC, section 1401 (a) (Computation of retired pay) disability, non-regular service, warrant officer, and DOPMA retirement states the monthly retired pay of a person entitled thereto under this subtitle is computed according to the following table. Title 10, section 1251 retired pay base as computed under Title 10, USC, section 1406 or 1407 and the retired pay multiplier prescribed in section 1409 (2.5x the members years of creditable service). 7. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or request additional evidence or opinions. Additionally, it states in paragraph 2-11 that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20220001878 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1