Officer Promotions and the NDAA 19

Posted on

Physicians are always interested in promotions, and the proposed NDAA 19 makes a number of changes to officer promotions. If you want the scoop, first I’d read this article from Military Times:

Congress is Giving the Officer Promotion System a Massive Overhaul

In addition, here are the relevant changes I pulled out of an article from the DHA Early Bird a few days ago:

  • Officers will continue to be considered for promotion as part of the same year group in which they were promoted to their current rank.
  • Congress is required to annually authorize the number of officers allowed to serve in the ranks of O­4 through O­6 across all the services.
  • It repeals a requirement that candidates for regular commissions not be older than 42, or at least have enough service years to complete 20 years by age 62.
  • ­It enhances the services’ authority to award constructive service credit for special private sector training or experience to allow active or reserve officer appointments up to the rank of O6 in critically ­needed fields.
  • Authorizing each service to award temporary promotions to the ranks O­3 through O­6 for specified positions. Only Navy has such authority today so this change would standardize it across all branches.
  • Authorizing promotion boards to recommend that “officers of particular merit” be placed higher on promotion lists than peers.
  • Allowing officers, when deemed in the best interest of the service, to have their names removed from consideration by a selection board for promotion to the next higher grade, and authorizing officers in certain military specialties to remain on active duty until reaching 40 years active service.
  • Authorizing use of an alternative promotion processes for officers in certain secretary­ designated competitive categories, to include a term­ based continuation process when certain officers are not selected for promotion. This would selectively end the traditional up ­or ­out requirement for officer management.

The devil’s in the details, and the Military Times article states that the changes are not mandatory for the services, so we’ll have to see how it all plays out over the next few years.

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s