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.