THIS IS A BIG DEAL!!! DoD Retention Policy for Non-Deployable Service Members

salute.jpg


This is the link to the DoD policy and PEB FORUM resource for the DOD Retention Policy for Non-Deployable Service Members .

Let's discuss the most important parts of the policy memorandum.

"The Deputy Secretary of Defense directed the following interim policy guidance, which will remain in effect until the Department issues a DoD Instruction on reporting and retention of non-deployable Service members:
• Service members who have been non-deployable for more than 12 consecutive months, for any reason, will be processed for administrative separation in accordance with Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.14, Enlisted Administrative Separations, or DoD Instruction 1332.30, Separation of Regular and Reserve Commissioned Officers, or will be referred into the Disability Evaluation System in
accordance with DoDI 1332.18, Disability Evaluation System (DES) . Pregnant and post-partum Service members are the only group automatically excepted from this policy.

The Military Services have until October 1, 2018, to begin mandatory processing of non-deployable Service members for administrative or disability separation under this policy, but they may begin such processing immediately."

This is a big deal. We will have to see what the ultimate guidance states. (And, how the services implement this- either through policy guidance or execution of the DoD policy memorandum.) However, I see a few potential issues and points.

First, if the requirement is to process non-deployable members for separation (including DES processing) this may help members who are "strung along" in getting referred or processed through the DES. It is forward looking, but, this policy may help those who are separated erroneously in challenging their separation and access to adjudication through the DES.

Second, this policy would seem to aid in the claims for continued compensation for those who are separated or not paid for active duty pay despite having conditions that make then non-deployable.

Third, this may impact adjudication of conditions for the folks on the TDRL.

Finally, this may impact members who hoped to continue service despite being technically "non-deployable." I can see this impacting the calculus for members in how they present their conditions to their providers and how they approach their cases.
 
Jason Perry

Comments

Former MiTT Team Leader

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
#2
Honorable Mr. Perry, would you be willing to explain what you perhaps foresee as issues with:

"Third, this may impact adjudication of conditions for the folks on the TDRL?"

I ask for several reason's, 1) While I was on TDRL, I was told by TDRL examiner at Ft. Benning, those placed on TDRL MH Conditions are in fact almost "never" returned to active duty!" If, this is in fact case, which based on your experience as JAG Formal PEB Chief in TX would "assume" you would know-perhaps, then why are they placed on TDRL at all to begin with?"

2) While on TDRL, and after, the US DVA MH Provider treating me, (who died of brain tumor), told me he had "patients" on TDRL in local Gulf Coast VA System for over the "five" year limit, and were in fact so bad off could not "take" care of themselves and had "funds" cut off, as well as significantly "low" VA ratings, that further contributed to their "issues," as well as placing sigificant burden "famly" etc....! So my question here would be, if case number one, hardly any members on TDRL MH reason's returned "duty,"- is "true" and if still on TDRL after 5-year limit, what is the point of TDRL for MH Conditions, anyway, and what impact this "Directive" will in fact on anyone in above situation still possibly on TDRL past 5-year limit?

3) Would you make any recommendations' as what should be done/changed/modified- in light of this "Directive," with the whole convoluted and overly complex, "TDRL" system??????

4) Perhaps, deyond your purvue, but US State Department Officals' and Merchant Mariners, can utilize the US DVA System, are they in fact held to same "rating" and compensation "standards" as US Armed Services Members'????? If so are they "considered" "non-deplorable," etc...within-in their own "system's" like etc... US Armed Service Members affected by this "Directive"...?????

Thank you Honorable Mr. Perry, and belive this best website out there for Veterans', etc.. issues......"being no "expert" by any means in these matters, but a simple "yokel," myself, which as per "Merriam-Webster" word of day 20- FEB 2018, "365 New Words-A-Year Page-A-Day Calendar 2018- Calendar – Day to Day Calendar, August 3, 2017" by Merriam-Webster (Author) (at https://www.amazon.com/Words-Year-P...8424&sr=8-2&keywords=365+words+a+day+calendar), is "a naive or gullible inhabitant of a rural area or small town...!"
 
Last edited:
#3
View attachment 2571


This is the link to the DoD policy and PEB FORUM resource for the DOD Retention Policy for Non-Deployable Service Members .

Let's discuss the most important parts of the policy memorandum.

"The Deputy Secretary of Defense directed the following interim policy guidance, which will remain in effect until the Department issues a DoD Instruction on reporting and retention of non-deployable Service members:
• Service members who have been non-deployable for more than 12 consecutive months, for any reason, will be processed for administrative separation in accordance with Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.14, Enlisted Administrative Separations, or DoD Instruction 1332.30, Separation of Regular and Reserve Commissioned Officers, or will be referred into the Disability Evaluation System in
accordance with DoDI 1332.18, Disability Evaluation System (DES) . Pregnant and post-partum Service members are the only group automatically excepted from this policy.

The Military Services have until October 1, 2018, to begin mandatory processing of non-deployable Service members for administrative or disability separation under this policy, but they may begin such processing immediately."

This is a big deal. We will have to see what the ultimate guidance states. (And, how the services implement this- either through policy guidance or execution of the DoD policy memorandum.) However, I see a few potential issues and points.

First, if the requirement is to process non-deployable members for separation (including DES processing) this may help members who are "strung along" in getting referred or processed through the DES. It is forward looking, but, this policy may help those who are separated erroneously in challenging their separation and access to adjudication through the DES.

Second, this policy would seem to aid in the claims for continued compensation for those who are separated or not paid for active duty pay despite having conditions that make then non-deployable.

Third, this may impact adjudication of conditions for the folks on the TDRL.

Finally, this may impact members who hoped to continue service despite being technically "non-deployable." I can see this impacting the calculus for members in how they present their conditions to their providers and how they approach their cases.
 
#4
Hello Mr. Perry and posters,

I've been a visitor of this site for about two years and finally decided to register once I gained interest in the "Deploy or get out" directive situation as it can affect me individually.

I am E7 in the air force reserves (Robins AFB) with 15 good years (3yrs AD Reg Army & 12yrs AF Res). I was placed on a Code 37 profile (which is still current) for PTSD (diagnosed by VA 2014 @ 100%) December 2016. The MEB initiation was put on hold until an LOD investigation has been completed. An LOD investigation was initiated (by me) Mar 2017. As of right now the LOD has been someone's desk and the medical review board section since 13 June 2017 per the LOD program manager. Since LODs have such a major impact on medical readiness, benefits and retention, how do you see the new directive affecting members on permanent profiles waiting for one process while being held up by another? ALL insight and opinions from all are welcome. Thanks!
 

chaplaincharlie

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
#5
View attachment 2571
This is a big deal. We will have to see what the ultimate guidance states. (And, how the services implement this- either through policy guidance or execution of the DoD policy memorandum.) However, I see a few potential issues and points.

I understand the need for a ready force. That being said the details to come bear watching. The devil is always in the details.

Perhaps, as you pointed out this may help some who are lingering. My concern is the flood is coming and the system will likely not handle it well.
 

MaxMillion

Registered Member
#7
View attachment 2571


This is the link to the DoD policy and PEB FORUM resource for the DOD Retention Policy for Non-Deployable Service Members .

Let's discuss the most important parts of the policy memorandum.

"The Deputy Secretary of Defense directed the following interim policy guidance, which will remain in effect until the Department issues a DoD Instruction on reporting and retention of non-deployable Service members:
• Service members who have been non-deployable for more than 12 consecutive months, for any reason, will be processed for administrative separation in accordance with Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.14, Enlisted Administrative Separations, or DoD Instruction 1332.30, Separation of Regular and Reserve Commissioned Officers, or will be referred into the Disability Evaluation System in
accordance with DoDI 1332.18, Disability Evaluation System (DES) . Pregnant and post-partum Service members are the only group automatically excepted from this policy.

The Military Services have until October 1, 2018, to begin mandatory processing of non-deployable Service members for administrative or disability separation under this policy, but they may begin such processing immediately."

This is a big deal. We will have to see what the ultimate guidance states. (And, how the services implement this- either through policy guidance or execution of the DoD policy memorandum.) However, I see a few potential issues and points.

First, if the requirement is to process non-deployable members for separation (including DES processing) this may help members who are "strung along" in getting referred or processed through the DES. It is forward looking, but, this policy may help those who are separated erroneously in challenging their separation and access to adjudication through the DES.

Second, this policy would seem to aid in the claims for continued compensation for those who are separated or not paid for active duty pay despite having conditions that make then non-deployable.

Third, this may impact adjudication of conditions for the folks on the TDRL.

Finally, this may impact members who hoped to continue service despite being technically "non-deployable." I can see this impacting the calculus for members in how they present their conditions to their providers and how they approach their cases.
Hello,
I am found unfit by the peb for pancreatitis and goalblader issue. and recomended for permanent retireent. I am told by Doctors if I get my goalblader removed I might not have the reecurring pain I have been having. What are the chances of convincing the peb to let me have my already appoved surgery and return me to duty? I also worry about the new deploy or out policy. I've been non deployable for 8 months now. am I take a bad risk?
 

AFOddJob

Registered Member
#8
Question for folks out there... Has anyone out there witnessed any changes with the services due to this recent retention policy memo? Anyone have any visibility in regard to what the services are doing to meet the intent of the new policy?
 

navycop

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
#9
I know on the navy side. They are putting together a list for the big wigs of everyone at the command who falls under that retention rule
 

strabo100

PEB Forum Regular Member
#10
I wonder if this will apply for me. I enlisted in 2008, was sent to PEB in 2010. Found fit but not worldwide deployable by PEB in 2011. Got NEC 0091 added in my records. Has been on shore duty the whole time in the Navy. I just got new orders and will PCS in May, still on shore orders.
 

franco1970

Registered Member
#11
Air National Guard 28 years and ticking.
Just diagnosed by VA with an Aortic Aneurysm 4.4cm, and dyspnea (shortness of breath/ on some meds). I disclosed to medical on drill weekend. They found those two items unfit for duty. They are referring me to FSS for a briefing and ask if I want a waiver or not. Not sure what to do with this new guidance. Will they just administratively retire me, should I inquire about a medical disqualification or just not bother and retire? I humbly ask Mr. Perry, what would you suggest?
 

franco1970

Registered Member
#12
No updates yet, I have an appointment with VA liaison to submit a claim package for Aneurysm and dyspnea. Currently have rating of 60% for other issues. Next month I need to give an answer to FSS if i want to get a waiver or force my hand to retire (E-8 over 20 ANG).
 

oddpedestrian

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
#13
I would think you will see far more admin separations compare to folks being referred to the board. We will have to see the numbers once it rolls out.
 

aamonroe

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
#14
I think this policy will at least be helpful for people, like my husband, who have conditions rated at an amount straddling the retirement line (he has type1 diabetes, and it's only rated at 20%). If this policy were in place at the time he was discharged, he never would have tried to be returned to duty due to his code-c2 status, and would have put all his energy into being medically retired.
 

NWhawkdriver

Registered Member
#15
I wonder if this will apply for me. I enlisted in 2008, was sent to PEB in 2010. Found fit but not worldwide deployable by PEB in 2011. Got NEC 0091 added in my records. Has been on shore duty the whole time in the Navy. I just got new orders and will PCS in May, still on shore orders.
I’m in the same ‘boat’. FFD by PEB in 2015, but permanently non-deployable. I’d be mentally prepared for it to happen. My only question is for all of us in this position , will we have the option of medical retirement and not just be administratively separated?
 

Usmcjoker

Registered Member
#16
I’m in the same ‘boat’. FFD by PEB in 2015, but permanently non-deployable. I’d be mentally prepared for it to happen. My only question is for all of us in this position , will we have the option of medical retirement and not just be administratively separated?
Have you heard anything about being non deployable and staying in? i was found Fit for continued service in the Marine Corps but HQMC told me that if i can't do physical activities that i can't reenlist but the Med Board accepted my limitations. I go speak with my doctor today because its almost been 6 months so i can possibly resubmit.
 
data-matched-content-ui-type="image_stacked" data-matched-content-rows-num="3" data-matched-content-columns-num="1" data-ad-format="autorelaxed">

Online statistics

Members online
10
Guests online
79
Total visitors
89