Comment on FR Doc # 2010-24496

The proposed regulations lack clarity as to the transferability of the Customs and Border Protection Officer retirement coverage to the other special classes covered under similar retirement provisions. In the proposed regulation, 842.208 (a) (1) and (2) note that separation is possible after 25 years of service or 20 years of service at age fifty, and notes that the years of service can include “any combination” of employment as a firefighter, customs and border protection officer, law enforcement officer, Capitol or Supreme Court police, or nuclear materials courier. This statement seems to imply that an employee, once covered under any of the special classes, can transfer to any other special class. Consider the case of a person who becomes employed as a customs and border protection officer (or any other special class) at age 28 and obtains 10 years of service in that class. This person is now 38 years of age, beyond the age by which (in most cases) one must become employed to comply with the mandatory retirement provision of 20 years of service by age 57. Even though beyond the age to obtain 20 years of service, can that person transfer to a position as a law enforcement officer (or another of the special covered classes) that requires 20 years of service by obtained by age 57? A second area where the regulation lacks clarity is with the mandatory separation provisions. 842.1006 exempts customs and border protection officers from mandatory separation if they were employed in that positions on July 6, 2008. I again pose the question of a person who transfers to another of the special covered classes who was employed as a customs and border protection officer on July 6, 2008. Is this person only exempt from mandatory separation while employed as a customs and border protection officer, or is that person now exempt from mandatory separation while employed in any of the special classes?