Vision Waivers

[gopher_MN]

So I was selected at last week's intel DCO board, and I'm starting to work on the medical stuff. My left eye is *not* correctable to 20/20. My understanding, which I've gotten from several sources, is that if either eye isn't correctable to 20/20 it requires a waiver, but that usually such waivers are doable within certain constraints; but the person I'm working with on it just called and said she'd heard that vision not correctable to 20/20 isn't waiverable. She's checking further; is this true?

I'm not going in to the specifics of my situation because I know my specific case will be difficult; but in general, I thought restricted-line communities typically would allow waivers for vision not correctable to 20/20.

 

[das]

Hello gopher_MN,

According to NAVMED P-117 (Manual of the Medical Department, MANMED) Chapter 15:

Section 15-36 Vision - Commission and Programs Leading to a Commission

[...]

(3) For Commission in the Navy Restricted Line, Staff Corps, and designators not included in article 15-37(3) above.
(a) Current distant or near visual acuity of any degree that does not correct with spectacle lenses to 20/20 in each eye is disqualifying.

That said, I am not a Navy physician, nor an authority on this information. It has oft been repeated here that "anything is waiverable" within limits, so I wouldn't necessarily give up upon reading that...

 

[gopher_MN]

Thanks for posting that. I've known all along that it's disqualifying; but that *by itself* doesn't mean it can't be waivered. I have now heard back from the PO I'm working with and it sounds less black and white than she'd originally stated - sounds like I should at least be able to pursue the waiver, which is more in line with what I'd understood.

 

[das]

Sure thing...I figure information is your best weapon, and many "disqualifying" things are waiverable. At least you know what the source is, and now you can push forward. I didn't see anything that waivers were not allowed, and for some things it explicitly says as much. Best of luck!

 

[mrcuento]

Gopher MN,

While researching physical exam options, I ran into the link below which contains significant info that may help you know where you stand with regard to medical waivers. Hope this helps and congratulations as well.

http://www.cnrc.navy.mil/officer/Manual/1131.2C_CH2.doc

 

[gopher_MN]

Thanks so much mrcuento, this really clarifies things. It looks to me like my eye issue is completely waiverable, and the waiver process doesn't sound as bad as I'd feared. I've forwarded along some questions specifically pertaining to my case based on the information in that document. Thanks!

 

[gopher_MN]

Well, I heard this morning that my waiver request was denied. My right eye corrects to 20/20 and my left eye corrects to 20/40. I'm quite disappointed, but that's the end of my road. My application was excellent and all the intel people I talked with were eager to have me; I heard repeatedly that my minor vision issue would be no problem in the work, and my select was exciting. It's too bad that they let bureaucrats disqualify those professionally selected by their community for a medical thing that will have no bearing on the work; but, that's the way it is and I accept that.

I wonder if the USCG might be more willing to work with my left eye...

 

[das]

gopher_MN,

I'm very sorry to hear that. It really sucks; no two ways about it.

I have not confirmed this directly with a Coast Guard recruiter, but my understanding of the Coast Guard Intel DCO process is that an existing TS/SCI clearance is required (not just the ability to obtain one):

Security Clearance: Must currently hold and be able to maintain Director of Central Intelligence Directive (DCID 6/4)/Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) eligibility

Now the way this is worded, a strict reading is that you "must currently hold and be able to maintain [...] eligibility", not necessarily the clearance itself, and if this process has taught me anything, it's that a very close reading of the applicable rules and regulations is in order...like I said, I haven't spoken with the Coast Guard, so I'm not sure on this.

From your posts, I know you're non-prior, but I don't know whether you had a clearance via some other channel. For what it's worth, the Army also as a Reserve Direct Commission Officer program. You may be interested in pursuing the Military Intelligence (MI) branch, or at least looking into it if some of the specific medical/physical requirements are a bit different.

There are many ways to serve your country. If serving in some capacity -- even if it's not in a military role -- is what you want, don't give up! We need people who are knowledgeable and dedicated, and part of that is not letting the deficiencies in the system hold you back. It may sound trite, but I'm serious. Don't give up on your dream of serving, even if it may take a different form...

 

[gopher_MN]

Thanks, sorry to hear about your PDQ. What's really frustrating to me is that the US Army only requires an officer's eyes to be correctable to either 20/40 in the strong eye and 20/70 in the weak, 20/30 and 20/100, or 20/20 and 20/400. Those are the Army's *CORRECTABLE TO* standards. The Navy just says correctable to 20/20 in both eyes, claiming to offer waivers but not actually doing so. Given that intel work is functionally identical in the two branches, I don't see how they can defend this huge gap in expectations. I suppose I could look at doing MI in the army; for some reason that just doesn't sound like something I want to do. Strange the preconceptions of the branches we have.

 

[EM1]

claiming to offer waivers but not actually doing so.

I think you misunderstand the waiver process.

The Navy will grant a waiver, if they need to. Your issue right now is that they dont need to grant waivers (or exceptions to published policy) when they have 15 people behind you who dont need waivers at all and the Navy is at or exceeding manning. It sucks, and I am very sorry that you want this so badly and cant get it, but maybe in a few years things will be different. Who knows? But there are reasons they have policies, and reasons they try not to grant waivers if they dont have to.

As for the Army and Navy Intel jobs being "functionally" the same: perhaps on some levels, but not all. For one, an Army Intel guy will never end up on a submarine as a rider for Intel collection.

 

[gopher_MN]

Fair enough, I understand and it does make sense; it's just that in my situation it's hard to reconcile why the different branches' standards are so different. I might inquire with the Air Force - I know they do have DCO programs, though I don't know whether they would match up with me. The Navy program matches up so well with my interests, my abilities, etc.