[00:00:43] Speaker 00:
We will hear argument next in Montelongo versus OPM, case number 182095.

[00:00:51] Speaker 00:
Mr. Scheuchatbrod?

[00:00:58] Speaker 01:
Yes, Judge.

[00:00:59] Speaker 01:
Close?

[00:01:00] Speaker 01:
Close, very close.

[00:01:01] Speaker 01:
OK, all right.

[00:01:02] Speaker 01:
May it please the court, Alan Scheuchatbrod on behalf of Tully Renke for the petitioner, Michael Montelongo.

[00:01:07] Speaker 01:
The central facts are not in dispute in this appeal.

[00:01:11] Speaker 01:
It's really grounded on the pure legal issue.

[00:01:14] Speaker 01:
Weather Cadet Service in the United States Military Academy accounts for the five-year threshold of creditable civilian service for a title to a deferred FERS annuity.

[00:01:27] Speaker 01:
Briefly, Petitioner was a cadet at West Point for four years.

[00:01:30] Speaker 01:
In the 1970s, he went on to serve in the military, retired as Lieutenant Colonel with the Army.

[00:01:37] Speaker 01:
That service is not an issue in this case, his service with the Army.

[00:01:40] Speaker 01:
He later went on to become, in 2001, a presidential appointee.

[00:01:44] Speaker 03:
But at the time he was serving, the CSRS was still in effect, or it first hadn't come into play.

[00:01:50] Speaker 01:
Yeah, at the time he became a presidential appointee, he was a presidential appointee.

[00:01:55] Speaker 03:
Right, I'm just going to history, because as I recall, CSRS at that point in time was clear that the service in the academy didn't qualify.

[00:02:03] Speaker 03:
At the time he was serving, if he bothered to look this up, he would have known that CSRS said it doesn't qualify.

[00:02:10] Speaker 01:
Yes, Your Honor.

[00:02:13] Speaker 01:
At this point of the appeal, what we believe does qualify cadet service is the National Defense Authorization Act of fiscal year 2008, which amended the FERS and CSRS statutes, specifically with regard to the definitions under those statutes.

[00:02:31] Speaker 03:
And that statute defines cadet service as military service, correct?

[00:02:36] Speaker 01:
Yes, and that's respondents' argument and what the board found.

[00:02:39] Speaker 03:
But that's true, isn't it?

[00:02:40] Speaker 01:
Well, what's important about the defense authorization?

[00:02:44] Speaker 03:
A yes or a no answer.

[00:02:46] Speaker 01:
I think it deserves one, doesn't it?

[00:02:47] Speaker 01:
The plain reading of the Authorization Act does have to do with service.

[00:02:50] Speaker 01:
As military service.

[00:02:51] Speaker 01:
As military service.

[00:02:52] Speaker 01:
But what's important is what follows that amendment, as Section 1115 specifically applied that definition to any annuity of eligibility for which is based upon separation occurring before, on, or after the date of the enactment.

[00:03:09] Speaker 01:
or for any period of service as a cadet in the academy before, on, or after the date of enactment.

[00:03:15] Speaker 01:
So even if cadet service is what we said in our brief, pure military service, the NDAA of 2008 would actually save it because cadet service specifically applies to any induity which falls under the eligibility aspect of work.

[00:03:32] Speaker 00:
Isn't that just a timing provision?

[00:03:34] Speaker 00:
That is, it doesn't say how to count

[00:03:39] Speaker 00:
the Cadet Service, this is just an effective date provision so that in order to figure out which individuals are going to get the benefit of what the Act does, it looks at their eligibility date.

[00:03:53] Speaker 01:
Yes, it does look at eligibility, but it also, prior to the NDAA, it was questionable whether Cadet Service even counted for the buyback provisions of military service.

[00:04:03] Speaker 02:
It's not on the record, but this act specifically makes it clear that... So this lets it be counted for the buyback purposes, but it still doesn't address the fundamental question of what is eligible civilian service under 8410, does it?

[00:04:19] Speaker 02:
I mean, you're asking us to implicitly say that this provision in the Defense Authorization Act doesn't talk to the fundamental eligibility requirements of how implicitly amended the definition of civilian service.

[00:04:33] Speaker 01:
Explicitly, the NDAA doesn't say whether or not eligibility falls within that cadet service aspect.

[00:04:43] Speaker 02:
However... 8410 is pretty explicit, right?

[00:04:46] Speaker 02:
It says you have to have five years of civilian service to get a FERS in it, buddy.

[00:04:53] Speaker 01:
Yes, but it also says credible civilian service under Section 8411.

[00:04:57] Speaker 01:
In 8411, Sub-C talks about military service being credible.

[00:05:03] Speaker 02:
But it doesn't make it credible civil service.

[00:05:06] Speaker 02:
It allows you to buy back military service and count it towards your ultimate annuity.

[00:05:12] Speaker 02:
But it still doesn't transform the nature of it from military service to civil service, does it?

[00:05:17] Speaker 01:
Well, our position is that cadets serve.

[00:05:19] Speaker 02:
I mean, 8411 has a lot of different provisions.

[00:05:22] Speaker 02:
And it's not 8411, here are the kinds of civilian service.

[00:05:27] Speaker 02:
It's a lot of different ways to credit different kinds of service throughout the federal government towards annuities.

[00:05:34] Speaker 02:
And when it says credible under 8411 for purposes of 8410, isn't it just saying, look to 8411 to determine

[00:05:44] Speaker 02:
what civilian service is credible and what's not.

[00:05:48] Speaker 02:
Isn't that a fair reading of it?

[00:05:50] Speaker 01:
I believe that's fair reading.

[00:05:51] Speaker 01:
I also believe fair reading is the statute provides that 8411 defines what credible civilian service is as well.

[00:05:59] Speaker 02:
But where does it say it's defining credible civilian service?

[00:06:02] Speaker 01:
Well, 8411.

[00:06:04] Speaker 02:
It's titled credible service, not credible civilian service.

[00:06:08] Speaker 01:
Sure.

[00:06:09] Speaker 01:
And civilian service, our position is credible.

[00:06:14] Speaker 01:
and does include military service, but I think the nature of cadet service is quite different than actual military service.

[00:06:20] Speaker 02:
You're not trying to argue that cadet service is civil service, are you?

[00:06:25] Speaker 02:
I mean, the very act you were pointing us to to clarify, this still includes cadets under military service.

[00:06:34] Speaker 01:
Yes, Your Honor.

[00:06:35] Speaker 01:
But for example, OPM's implementing regulations for FERS at 5 CFR 842.304 sub B defines civilian service to include service credit in the cadet nurse corps.

[00:06:47] Speaker 01:
That, in addition to the nature of what cadet service actually is, these individuals are students.

[00:06:52] Speaker 01:
They're trainees.

[00:06:53] Speaker 01:
They're not active duty military.

[00:06:55] Speaker 01:
The potential is that they do become officers later on after they finish their education.

[00:07:00] Speaker 01:
But at the time they're in that cadet service, it doesn't really count for much.

[00:07:04] Speaker 01:
It doesn't count for military retirement purposes, especially for officers.

[00:07:09] Speaker 02:
So that happens all the time with all kinds of civil service, too.

[00:07:14] Speaker 02:
There are certain positions in the federal government that you work for the federal government, you get paid by the federal government, and it's not creditable.

[00:07:24] Speaker 02:
It's not even that it makes you eligible.

[00:07:26] Speaker 02:
It's not creditable at all.

[00:07:29] Speaker 02:
Cadets may honorably serve at these military academies and not get credit for them sometimes.

[00:07:36] Speaker 02:
Why isn't that just a function of Congress's decision not to put it towards either?

[00:07:42] Speaker 02:
military or civilian service.

[00:07:44] Speaker 02:
Although it's clear now, I think we all agree that you can use it to add on, but it's still the baseline for civilian annuities has always been five years of civil service.

[00:07:55] Speaker 02:
And I don't understand how something that's specifically defined in the statute as military service could ever be considered towards that basic eligibility requirement.

[00:08:06] Speaker 01:
Well, Your Honor, respectfully, I believe it's just the nature of what cadet service is and how cadet service is treated by OPM in different contexts.

[00:08:15] Speaker 02:
We've referenced- But you don't mean military academy service.

[00:08:20] Speaker 02:
Well, for well, let me back up.

[00:08:22] Speaker 02:
I understand OPM's regulations on this are somewhat confusing.

[00:08:26] Speaker 02:
OPM could do a much better job of clarifying things.

[00:08:30] Speaker 02:
Everybody knows this, but you know that that isn't an argument for.

[00:08:34] Speaker 02:
Somehow stopping the government or, you know, reading this plain language of the statute some other way.

[00:08:41] Speaker 02:
Right?

[00:08:41] Speaker 02:
That's what Richmond says.

[00:08:43] Speaker 01:
Sure.

[00:08:43] Speaker 01:
And Your Honor, I understand you are on the panel for Reed, which is a non-precedential decision that weighs in favor of the respondents here.

[00:08:51] Speaker 01:
But Judge Toronto, you were on Solinsky, where in that decision, although it was not dispositive to the opinion, that opinion actually wrote that

[00:09:02] Speaker 01:
The court noted by statute the federal employee must complete at least five years of credible civilian service to include military service if that employee made a required deposit.

[00:09:11] Speaker 03:
Well, the government has conceded in its briefs that that was a mistake.

[00:09:17] Speaker 03:
The line in that opinion comes directly out of the government's brief in that case, literally quoted in that non-presidential opinion.

[00:09:26] Speaker 03:
And the government has conceded in its briefs here in its opinion.

[00:09:31] Speaker 01:
And I understand non-precedential decisions have no binding impact on this court, but it does seem... It was Dicta in also, right?

[00:09:39] Speaker 03:
It was Dicta, but Zelensky and Reed... And you have Dicta in that case and you've got a holding in the later case.

[00:09:47] Speaker 01:
Yes, the Reed case is later.

[00:09:49] Speaker 01:
The Reed case, however, was different as our position was or is.

[00:09:54] Speaker 01:
That was pure military service.

[00:09:55] Speaker 01:
That was first service member, active duty service person who was trying to buy back the military time to tack on.

[00:10:01] Speaker 01:
to their five-year requirement.

[00:10:03] Speaker 01:
Here, we're saying that cadet service is its own hybrid, just like dual-status technicians, national technicians.

[00:10:10] Speaker 02:
Well, that would be OK if you had some kind of statutory language that said that, but you have the opposite that specifically defines cadet service as military service.

[00:10:21] Speaker 01:
Yes, but we believe that if we read section 1115 of the NDA further, it does apply to any annuity, and it falls under the eligibility requirements.

[00:10:32] Speaker 00:
Can I follow up on something I think I heard you say that at least I didn't remember?

[00:10:39] Speaker 00:
Did you make a reference to an OPM regulation speaking to the Nurses' Corps?

[00:10:47] Speaker 03:
Yes, Your Honor.

[00:10:50] Speaker 00:
So first, what does it say?

[00:10:52] Speaker 00:
And second, did you put that in your brief?

[00:10:55] Speaker 01:
Yes, it is in the brief.

[00:10:56] Speaker 01:
And I can cite you to the page in the brief.

[00:10:58] Speaker 00:
But what page?

[00:11:12] Speaker 01:
Regulation is 5 CFR A42.304 sub B. We cite it in the brief at pages 11, 22, and 23.

[00:11:28] Speaker 01:
So in that full second paragraph on the bottom, similarly, that regulation defines civilian service to include, among other things, service credit in the cadet nurse corps, which we believe provides substantial evidence that cadet service is treated quite differently than pure military service.

[00:11:46] Speaker 01:
For example, 5 USC 2102 includes, under the definition of an employee, an individual who works at various positions at the US Naval Academy.

[00:11:57] Speaker 01:
Again, this supports substantial evidence that the military academies are treated differently than other military components.

[00:12:04] Speaker 01:
We understand that it's been this court's precedent.

[00:12:06] Speaker 02:
I don't understand that argument.

[00:12:08] Speaker 02:
Is that just saying some people that work at the academy are in the civilian service and some are in the military?

[00:12:14] Speaker 02:
But that's true even at military bases.

[00:12:18] Speaker 02:
There are tons of civilian service employees at military bases that are not enlisted or otherwise officers that do work on a military base and perform civilian service.

[00:12:30] Speaker 02:
The fundamental difference is, is their service defined as military service or civilian service?

[00:12:39] Speaker 01:
The only decision on point is the Brown decision that the respondents briefed, the 1989 presidential decision.

[00:12:45] Speaker 01:
But our position is that predates the 2018 NDAA and also predates the manner in which cadets were able to buy back such military service.

[00:12:54] Speaker 01:
And also, our reading of that section of the Authorization Act, in our opinion, states that...

[00:13:02] Speaker 02:
So your position is, because of the way 8410 and 8411 are structured in this NDAA, or even setting aside that NDAA, you can buy back military service to count as civilian service for purposes of establishing entitlement to a civil service annuity.

[00:13:21] Speaker 01:
our position is actually much more narrow.

[00:13:23] Speaker 01:
It's not all military service with this particular cadet service.

[00:13:26] Speaker 02:
But how do you limit that, since the provision you're relying on in 8411 doesn't just relate to cadet service, it relates to all military service?

[00:13:37] Speaker 01:
It does include under a subsea military service and the time periods, but

[00:13:41] Speaker 02:
I mean, the logical extension of your argument is it not that.

[00:13:45] Speaker 02:
If you want to buy back military service, you can buy back 5 years of military service, say, it's civilian service.

[00:13:52] Speaker 02:
And then get a civil service.

[00:13:56] Speaker 01:
Well, logically, yes.

[00:13:58] Speaker 02:
Well, I mean, we have to deal with the, we're not dealing with just the facts.

[00:14:02] Speaker 02:
As applied to your case.

[00:14:04] Speaker 02:
We have to deal with the logical extensions of that.

[00:14:08] Speaker 02:
And I mean, it seems fairly unlikely that Congress intended somebody to be able to serve in the military, never serve a single day of civilian service, but buy back five years or however many years and get a civil service annuity instead of a military service annuity.

[00:14:24] Speaker 01:
But our facts are quite different.

[00:14:26] Speaker 02:
Again, I know I understand, but the legal position you're relying on has a logical consequence in 8410 and 8411.

[00:14:37] Speaker 02:
And you're the way you're reading the interplay would seem to suggest that result.

[00:14:44] Speaker 01:
Again, this court's precedent doesn't.

[00:14:47] Speaker 01:
never ruled in that way.

[00:14:49] Speaker 01:
The Brown case, obviously, rules the other way, that military service is not necessarily defined as civilian service for purposes of the first statute.

[00:14:58] Speaker 01:
The Reed decision, also, that non-precedential opinion makes that same conclusion.

[00:15:03] Speaker 01:
Our position here is not pure military service, like active duty, Title X, even Title 32.

[00:15:10] Speaker 02:
Do you know how much your client had to pay in a deposit to try to get this credited?

[00:15:16] Speaker 01:
Yes, I believe it's in the record.

[00:15:18] Speaker 01:
$452?

[00:15:20] Speaker 01:
Yes.

[00:15:21] Speaker 01:
It's approximately $500, $400.

[00:15:23] Speaker 01:
And at that time, he was serving at the Air Force as a civilian.

[00:15:33] Speaker 01:
If there are no other questions, I'll reserve my time.

[00:15:35] Speaker 00:
Thank you.

[00:15:35] Speaker 00:
And you have three minutes for rebound.

[00:15:40] Speaker 04:
Can I please the court?

[00:15:42] Speaker 04:
The court should affirm MSUB's decision, which

[00:15:45] Speaker 04:
had a firm OPM's decision denying Mr. Montelongo's application for basic annuity.

[00:15:51] Speaker 04:
The statute in this case is clear.

[00:15:53] Speaker 04:
It provides that you need five years of civilian service, at least five years of civilian service, to be eligible for an annuity.

[00:15:59] Speaker 04:
It has long been the case, even before FERS, under the Civil Service Retirement System, that you had to have five years of civilian service.

[00:16:05] Speaker 04:
And civilian service is distinct and different from military service that's borne out by the cases.

[00:16:12] Speaker 04:
And as the cases explain, including in Reed, you can't use military service to satisfy a threshold, a civilian service requirement.

[00:16:22] Speaker 02:
I know it's not a lot of money, but if you relied on that advice from somebody at the Air Force,

[00:16:27] Speaker 02:
I mean, can he at least get his deposit back from OPM?

[00:16:30] Speaker 04:
Your honor, in a November 2017 letter to Mr. Monte Longo, it was explained how he could go about requesting a refund of his contribution.

[00:16:40] Speaker 04:
And standing here today, I don't see any reason that that couldn't happen.

[00:16:45] Speaker 04:
In Reed, your honor.

[00:16:47] Speaker 02:
Were contributions taken out while he was in the civilian service as the assistant secretary?

[00:16:52] Speaker 02:
I believe that I believe that to be true, and there's a way to get those back to isn't it if you don't qualify for retirement.

[00:17:00] Speaker 04:
In this case can be decided just based on the plain language of the statute to read the statute.

[00:17:06] Speaker 04:
Otherwise, as read explained would would render the word civilians superfluous and in region point and read address Brown.

[00:17:15] Speaker 04:
and Brown's on point as well.

[00:17:17] Speaker 04:
Shalinski didn't address Brown, and unfortunately, and we apologize, Your Honor, we included a statement, a misstatement of the requirement there.

[00:17:24] Speaker 04:
But ultimately, it wasn't controlling as to the outcome of Shalinski.

[00:17:30] Speaker 03:
And that's because these... Well, what are we to do with the fact that OPM and the people who administer these laws disagree with you?

[00:17:37] Speaker 04:
In what respect?

[00:17:38] Speaker 03:
You've got OPM's, you know,

[00:17:41] Speaker 03:
rules and regulations that are out there to guide the public, and then you've got counselors who are working with those rules and regulations, and they're telling people, like the plaintiff in this case, you have a winning case.

[00:17:55] Speaker 04:
I think you're referring to the advice he received from an HR representative?

[00:17:59] Speaker 03:
Yeah, and also I'm referring to the confusing OPM regulations.

[00:18:04] Speaker 04:
the manual that's been cited.

[00:18:06] Speaker 04:
And we don't think it's confusing, Your Honor.

[00:18:09] Speaker 03:
Well, you've got three panels of this court to disagree with.

[00:18:14] Speaker 03:
Perhaps this one, at least two, disagree with you.

[00:18:17] Speaker 04:
Well, Your Honor, if that's a chapter of the manual with respect to credible military service, we don't think you need to look at the manual.

[00:18:26] Speaker 04:
As Reid said, ambiguous language can't be

[00:18:31] Speaker 04:
The language in the manual can't overrule a clear statute.

[00:18:34] Speaker 04:
You could look elsewhere.

[00:18:35] Speaker 03:
We don't think that... I understand that.

[00:18:36] Speaker 03:
But I mean, you've actually got a counselor here who says, well, I agree with you.

[00:18:40] Speaker 03:
The manual is very confusing, and you've got a good argument.

[00:18:43] Speaker 03:
I mean, what?

[00:18:44] Speaker 03:
I'm just trying to get with you to say what?

[00:18:47] Speaker 03:
Does the government doesn't care that there's a manual out there that is perhaps misleading?

[00:18:54] Speaker 04:
Certainly the government would care.

[00:18:55] Speaker 04:
And I would direct, Your Honor, I don't want to get too afar a field of...

[00:18:57] Speaker 04:
I would direct Your Honor to Chapter 45 of the manual, which discusses deferred retirement.

[00:19:02] Speaker 04:
There is clear language in there about military service not being used for civilian service.

[00:19:07] Speaker 04:
The language pointed to by Mr. Montelongo is not ambiguous.

[00:19:10] Speaker 04:
It's not confusing.

[00:19:12] Speaker 04:
It's been used by him to argue that military service can be used to satisfy it.

[00:19:17] Speaker 03:
Not just by him, by people who administer the laws, the counselors.

[00:19:21] Speaker 03:
I didn't get it.

[00:19:22] Speaker 03:
The counselor agreed with him.

[00:19:24] Speaker 03:
manuals, you've got an argument based on the manual.

[00:19:27] Speaker 04:
Oh, he said he had an argument.

[00:19:29] Speaker 04:
I don't know that he necessarily agreed that he was entitled to an annuity.

[00:19:33] Speaker 04:
I think you're referring to the evidence that Mr. Montelongo put forward that someone at OPM said he had, first the exact language he used, but I don't know.

[00:19:42] Speaker 00:
It's basically said, go to the board, something needs to be figured out.

[00:19:46] Speaker 04:
I don't read the evidence the way that OPM was agreeing with him that he's entitled to an annuity.

[00:19:51] Speaker 04:
So Brown is a presidential decision, and it's on point.

[00:19:55] Speaker 04:
It explains that military service can't be used to satisfy a threshold civilian service requirement.

[00:20:01] Speaker 04:
By statute, a cadet time is military service under Section 8401, the definitions.

[00:20:09] Speaker 04:
When Mr. Montelongo was at the academy, he was not an employee in the employment of the civil service.

[00:20:15] Speaker 04:
There has been no showing of that.

[00:20:18] Speaker 04:
It's defined as military service.

[00:20:20] Speaker 04:
In this court, in cases discussing 10 USC section 971, which addresses

[00:20:26] Speaker 04:
Do cadets get paid?

[00:20:28] Speaker 04:
I believe cadets do get paid.

[00:20:30] Speaker 04:
I believe they have health care.

[00:20:32] Speaker 03:
Out of what budget do they get paid?

[00:20:34] Speaker 04:
I'm not sure out of what budget, Your Honor.

[00:20:36] Speaker 04:
And I think they're defined as actions, you know.

[00:20:40] Speaker 04:
Well, it's not, it's Mr. Montelongo's obligation to prove that he was in civil service.

[00:20:45] Speaker 03:
Right, but it's not a question that you wouldn't, I thought I never would have asked.

[00:20:49] Speaker 04:
I would be speculating.

[00:20:51] Speaker 04:
Mr. Montelongo's counsel stated that he was not in active duty.

[00:20:57] Speaker 04:
I believe the cases that the court, in which the court addresses section 971, explain that, at least for VA benefits,

[00:21:06] Speaker 04:
It's defined as active duty, and he would look to 38 USC section 101.

[00:21:13] Speaker 04:
So Mr. Monte Longo was not a civil service employee when he was a cadet.

[00:21:18] Speaker 04:
And it would be ultimately his burden to show that he had a total of five years.

[00:21:22] Speaker 04:
He was only a civil service for less than four years after he retired from the military.

[00:21:27] Speaker 04:
And so based on the plain language of the statute, this court should affirm the Mr. B's decision.

[00:21:34] Speaker 03:
Is it common that members of the military who do have their five years of serving service will have both a civilian and a military retirement?

[00:21:43] Speaker 04:
Well, to be eligible for, so say, someone that worked in the military for a few years and then came to the Civil Service?

[00:21:50] Speaker 04:
Well, generally speaking, they wouldn't be receiving a retirement if they had five years of military service, came to work for the civil service.

[00:21:57] Speaker 04:
After five years in the civilian service, they'd be eligible for an annuity.

[00:22:00] Speaker 03:
Well, I'm talking about a situation like this.

[00:22:02] Speaker 03:
Somebody who served a long time in the military has a military pension.

[00:22:05] Speaker 03:
I thought there was something in the OPM manual about the fact that you had to wave off your military retirement in order to get a civilian retirement.

[00:22:13] Speaker 04:
So generally, there wouldn't be double counting.

[00:22:15] Speaker 04:
You wouldn't be receiving a military retirement and a civil service retirement for the same

[00:22:20] Speaker 04:
for this general speaking, for the same years of your service.

[00:22:23] Speaker 02:
So if you make the payment and get the military service credited, you can't also get a military pension on that.

[00:22:32] Speaker 04:
That's the general rule.

[00:22:33] Speaker 02:
But if you serve in the military for 20 or 25 years, retire, and then come work for the federal government and qualify for a civil service annuity

[00:22:45] Speaker 02:
based only on civil service, and don't make that credit, you can get both retirements.

[00:22:51] Speaker 02:
Can you not?

[00:22:51] Speaker 04:
Yeah, you can get military pay, retirement, and civilian service retirement.

[00:22:57] Speaker 04:
So based on the plain language of the statute here, we request that the court affirm the SBB's decision.

[00:23:05] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:23:05] Speaker 04:
So no further questions.

[00:23:06] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:23:12] Speaker 01:
Just very briefly, Your Honors, Emre Buddle

[00:23:15] Speaker 01:
Respondent's counsel mentioned Chapter 45 and the interplay between civilian and military service.

[00:23:20] Speaker 01:
Chapter 45 is not on the record.

[00:23:23] Speaker 01:
What is in the record is Chapter 22b, specifically at Appendix 54, 22b 2.1 sub 1, which talks about individuals in the government who have less than five years can use their military service to be counted as civilian service.

[00:23:40] Speaker 01:
And that's their own handbook.

[00:23:42] Speaker 01:
And to answer your honest question,

[00:23:44] Speaker 01:
Not on the record, but cadets do get paid.

[00:23:47] Speaker 01:
My review is that Air Force cadets receive approximately $800 a month.

[00:23:51] Speaker 01:
They get income tax and FICA taxes taken out.

[00:23:54] Speaker 01:
Obviously, I don't know the facts with regard to Mr. Montalago in the 1970s, but currently, that's the case.

[00:24:01] Speaker 01:
If there are no further questions.

[00:24:03] Speaker 00:
Thank you.

[00:24:04] Speaker 00:
Thanks for this council.

[00:24:05] Speaker 00:
Case is submitted.