Amendments
2025—Subsec. (d)(2)(B). [Pub. L. 119–60, § 7224(a)(1)], inserted “a” before “competent authority”.
Subsec. (d)(2)(C) to (H). [Pub. L. 119–60, § 7224(a)(2)], added subpars. (C) to (E) and redesignated former subpars. (C) to (E) as (F) to (H), respectively.
2021—Subsec. (a). [Pub. L. 116–283, § 8201(c)(1)], designated existing provisions as par. (1), inserted subsec. heading and par. (1) heading, substituted “A commissioned officer” for “Any commissioned officer, other than a commissioned warrant officer,”, “the commissioned officer” for “him”, and “the commissioned officer’s” for “his”, and added par. (2).
Subsec. (b). [Pub. L. 116–283, § 8201(c)(2)], inserted heading and substituted “the warrant officer” for “him” and “the warrant officer’s” for “his”.
Subsecs. (c) to (e). [Pub. L. 116–283, § 8201(c)(3)], added subsecs. (c) to (e).
2018—[Pub. L. 115–282] renumbered section 334 of this title as this section.
1994—Subsec. (b). [Pub. L. 103–337] substituted “section 580,” for “section 564 of title 10 (as in effect on the day before the effective date of the Warrant Officer Management Act) or”.
1991—Subsec. (b). [Pub. L. 102–190] substituted “section 564 of title 10 (as in effect on the day before the effective date of the Warrant Officer Management Act) or 1263, 1293, or 1305 of title 10” for “section 564, 1263, 1293, or 1305 of title 10”.
1986—Subsec. (a). [Pub. L. 99–348, § 205(b)(7)(A)], struck out “, with retired pay of the grade with which retired” after “satisfactory”.
Subsec. (b). [Pub. L. 99–348, § 205(b)(7)], struck out “, with retired pay of the grade with which retired” after “satisfactory” and struck out provision that when the rate of pay of such highest grade is less than the pay of the warrant grade with which the officer would otherwise be retired under section 1371 of title 10, the retired pay was to be based on the higher rate of pay.
1966—[Pub. L. 89–444] substituted “Grade on retirement” for “Retirement in cases where higher grade has been held” in section catchline.
Modifications and Revisions Relating to Reopening Retired Grade Determinations
[Pub. L. 119–60, div. G, title LXXII, § 7224(b)]–(d), Dec. 18, 2025, [139 Stat. 1703], provided that:“(b)
Issuance and Revision of Regulations Relating to Good Cause to Reopen Retired Grade Determinations.—
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 2025], the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall issue or revise, as applicable, and at the discretion of the Secretary consistent with this section, regulations of the Coast Guard to do the following:
“(1)
Define what constitutes good cause to reopen a retired grade determination referred to in subparagraph (H) of
section 2501(d)(2) of title 14, United States Code, as redesignated by subsection (a), to ensure that the following shall be considered good cause for such a reopening:
“(A)
Circumstances that constitute a failure to carry out applicable laws regarding a report of sexual assault with an intent to deceive by a commissioned officer, that relate to a response made to a report of sexual assault, during the commissioned service of the officer.
“(B)
Substantial evidence of sexual assault by the commissioned officer concerned, at any time during the commissioned service of such officer, or such evidence that was not considered by the Coast Guard in a manner consistent with law.
“(2)
Identify the standard for making, and the evidentiary showing required to support, an adverse determination on the retired grade of a commissioned officer.
“(c)
Revision of Limitations on Reopening Retired Grade Determinations.—
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall revise applicable guidance in section K.10 of chapter 3 of Commandant Instruction 1000.4A to remove any restriction that limits the ability to reopen the retired grade of a commissioned officer based on—
“(1)
whether new evidence is discovered contemporaneously with or within a short time period after the date of retirement of the officer concerned; and
“(2)
whether the misconduct concerned was not discoverable through due diligence.
“(d)
Savings Clause.—
No provision of this section [amending this section and enacting this note] or the amendments made by this section shall be construed to permit a review of conduct that was not in violation of law or policy at the time of the alleged conduct.”