LinkedIn Logo

Board for Correction Case No. 141-92

""

Board for Correction Case No. 141-92

211.00 Retention Special Pay - Change contract date

Recommendation of the Board for Correction on Request of: xxxxxx, Case No.141-92

Request:

Xxxxxx submitted an application to the Board for Correction of PHS Commissioned Corps Records (the Board) dated xxxx 1992, asking the Board to change the date of her Retention Special Pay (RSP) contract from xxxxxxx 1989, to Xxxxxx 1989, and her Incentive Special Pay (ISP) contract from Xxxx 1990, to Xxxxxx 1989. She asked that both contracts be effective as of her appointment date.

Officer's Argument and Documentation:

Xxxxxx contends that her request resulted from the loss of a financial benefit because of an alleged administrative error by PHS management. She alleged that during the orientation session following her appointment to the Corps, she was told by the orientation officer that her RSP contract:

" . . . had been taken care of in the mass of papers I had signed that day" and that our ISP pay...would automatically show up on our paychecks since we were working in an isolated-hardship area. . . . "

She also alleges that the information she received regarding the processing of her RSP and ISP contracts was incorrect and that the paperwork had not been initiated or completed as she had been told. She and her co-worker had to make a special effort to obtain the necessary contract forms.

Xxxxxx also alleges that the following facts are true regarding the processing of her contracts:

  1. She had both her RSP and ISP contracts notarized on Xxxx 1989, (about seven weeks after her appointment date) as verified by dated documents in her record, and sent them together to the IHS office where they had been received on Xxxx 1989, (verified by a signed return receipt in her record).
  2. The delay caused by the incorrect information she had received during the orientation session caused her RSP contract not to become effective until Xxxx 1989, (rather than her appointment date). The discrepancy between these two dates could cause her to remain on active duty after her appointment date without a contract.
  3. Although she had sent her ISP contract at the same time that she sent her RSP contract, the ISP contract had been misplaced (initially, she was told that she had sent it to the wrong office; later told that she had sent it to the right office). On xxx 1990, she had a second ISP contract notarized. DCP approved that contract effective xxx 1990, later changed to Xxxx 1990, (rather than the date of her appointment). The discrepancy between these two dates also could cause her to have to remain on active duty after her appointment date without a contract.

Corrective Action by the Division of Commissioned Personnel(DCP}:

DCP's record agreed with Xxxxxx statement of the facts. She had notarized contracts for RSP and ISP on xxxxxxx 1989. Her RSP contract was received by DCP on Xxxx 1989, and processed on that date pursuant to RSP policy. Her ISP contract did not reach DCP. Another ISP contract executed by her on xxx 1990, was received by DCP on xxx 1990. Under the policy for dating ISP contracts, DCP authorized an ISP contract with an effective date of Xxxx 1990.

The commissioned personnel at the IHS reviewed Xxxxxx application and confirmed that the information she had provided was correct. The IHS recommended that her request be approved. (DCP notes that the IHS has instituted new procedures to ensure that officers called to active duty would not experience similar problems). DCP also recommended that her request be approved but did not have the authority to backdate special pay contracts.

Accordingly, the Board members recommend that the effective date of Xxxxxx RSP contract be changed from Xxxx 1989, to Xxxxxx 1989, (backdating that contract by 63 days) and that the date of her ISP contract be changed from Xxxx 1990, to Xxxxxx 1989, (backdating that contract by 226 days). Approval of this recommendation requires that she be paid $1,575.00 on her RSP contract and $3,138.89 on her ISP contract or a total of $4,713.89.

We certify that this recommendation reflects the views and action taken by the Board on Xxxxxx request and that it has been concurred in by the Board members.

We certify, further, that the Case Record, shown as an Attachment contains all of the documentation received on Xxxxxx request and that, in addition to applicable statutes, regulations and policies, it has been considered by the Board in arriving at this recommendation.

Finally, we certify that a quorum of Board members was present on xxx 1993, when her request was considered.

If you approve, please sign below.

Sharon Smith Holston
Chairperson of the Board and
Associate Commissioner for Management, FDA

Reviewed and Approved:

I hereby approve the recommendation of the Board members on the request of Xxxxxx received and considered in accordance with the authority of section 221a(a) (12) of the Public Health Service Act (P.L. 96-76, as amended) and 42 U.S.C. 213a(a) (12), and authorize the Director, Division of Commissioned Personnel (DCP), Office of the Surgeon General/PHS to correct her record as stipulated and issue a Personnel Order changing the effective date of her Retention Special Pay (RSP) contract from xxxxx 1989, to Xxxxxx 1989, and the date of her Incentive Special Pay (ISP) contract from Xxxx 1990, to Xxxxxx 1989, and authorizing the retroactive payments.

Wilford J. Forbush
Director, Office of Management

Attachment: Case Record


Anyone wishing to obtain an un-redacted copy of any of the decisions should submit a request for the un-redacted decision under the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Such requests should be directed to the PHS FOIA Office, Parklawn Building, Room 17 A-46, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857; telephone 301-443-5252; fax 301-443-0925.