Thank you for writing and also visiting my office to explain your
views about a number of proposals of concern to civilian

technicians. You certainly have been an asset to your colleagues
as you continue to push for what you feel are necessary changes
in federal law.

My staff has prepared for me materials concerning not only the 8
December '83 law, but the other bills you are pursuing in
Congress. I have not yet made a decision on what bills I will
cosponor. However, you can be sure I will give each one serious
consideration. I believe if you look at my record you will see
that I have been very supportive of union concerns.

You explain in a concise manner what you consider to be the
problems with Public Law 98-212. I am reviewing this to ensure
that you and your colleagues receive fair treatment from the
federal government.

Again, thank you for contacting me on this important issue.
Sincerely,

Nicholas Mavroules
Member of Congress
NM/jp

THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE OF RECYCLED FIBERS

1. In accordance with AR 140-315, paragraph bi, military technicians may be retained in a military status to age 60 to attain eligibility for an immediate civil service annuity. Recently, OCAR has implemented an unwritten policy to disapprove requests for retention if a unit position would be blocked longer than one year. We understand that blocking a unit position may not be desirable, but we believe denying a military technician a livelihood and subsequent civil service annuity is a much larger: problem.

2.

We recently had two requests for retention disapproved. Une. individual is currently 49 years old with 19 years of Federal civil service and the other is 50 years old with 12 years.of. Federal service. The likelihood of further placement of these employees through the 000 Priority Placement Program is most unlikely because of lack of qualification requirements for non-military technician positions. We have resubmitted the one case for reconsideration and will be forwarding the other case in the near future.

:3. One command within First Army studied the civil service. retirement posture of the military technicians in the command. or those military technicians hired after December 1983, 55 out. of 80 military technicians would require a waiver for retention beyond MRD or maximum years service to attain civil service retirement eligibility. It is reasonable to predict, similiar results in other commands.

4. There are several options to resolve the problem:

a. Approve requests for retention to age 60 or civil service retirement eligibility whichever is earlier. The current regulations permit this.

T

b. Permit military technicians to remain as "status quo" technicians if retirement eligibility will be attained by age This option would require changes in legislation.

60.

c.

i

Assign the military technician to the IRR in the USAR Control Group Reinforcement or USAR Control Group Annual Training. Legislative changes would be required to implement this option.

6. Recommend that Department of the Army pursue legislative changes to allow assignment of military technicians to the IRR as indicated above. The military technician would be retained as a mobilization asset until civil service retirement; could perform AT with the unit he is serving as a technician; and could drill for retirement points only and maintain his military proficiency. FOR THE COMMANDER:

EDWARD M. BROWN;
Colonel, GS

Deputy Chief of Staff for
Personnel

19 OCT 1990

FCJ1-RAD

MEMORANDUM FOR Chief, Army Reserve, ATTN: DAAR-PE, Washington,
D.C. 20310-2400

SUBJECT:

Statutory and Regulatory Issues Governing Military

Technician Employment

1. Reference your letter dated 26 July 1990, subject: Publication of AR 140-315.

2. This office has begun to receive inquiries regarding the technician survey which was to have been completed by the end of October. Request a copy of the survey document and/or current status be provided as soon as possible since we understand that the completion of this action is a prerequisite to seeking appropriate legislative relief from the continuing provisions of PL 98-212 as it applies to "dual status."

3. In the interim, it appears that an immediate need exists to provide military technicians with appropriate relief from those statutory provisions which essentially prevent them from accepting a military reserve retirement without sacrificing their civilian job. An appropriate! exception policy which would allow us to retain technicians whose normal military career progression jeopardizes their civilian jobs is absolutely essential and appears to have the support of all concerned. Until PL 98-212 can be modified, recommend that an interim change be pursued which would allow otherwise qualified technicians caught up by this provision to retire and still retain their technician position.

4. Finally, we also recommend that appropriate action be taken to seek a further expansion of the "unit" definition to apply to Major US Army Reserve Commands (MUSARC). This would provide our MUSARC Commanders with the same area wide management authority and flexibility now enjoyed by ARNG State Adjutant Generals and would significantly increase the career opportunities available to our military technician force.

5.

LTC Kwiatkowski, AUTOVON 367-5692, can provide your staff with additional information.

FOR THE DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL:

Sierald T. M. &rachen).

DONALD T. MCCRACKEN, JR.
Colonel, USA

Chief, Reserve Affairs Division