LODs / MEB / PEB lost in the sauce

@Guardguy11 you inspired some new COAs for me as well. I don't know that they will go anywhere, but I just submitted 3 FOIA requests. 1 is for the General that denied my appeals. I requested how my many appeals have been approved/denied by him and his office for the last fiscal year. The second request was to Tyndall, AFB to request the CDI report for the impaired provider that injured me. The last one was to my Wing to include any emails that pertain to me in respect to LOD/MEB process/referral. I don't know that it will go anywhere, but I have time before pulling the trigger on the BCMR request. It would be nice to have some additional evidence. I'm sure like everything else so far they will find a way to not deliver them, but no stone unturned.
Go get'em, Tiger! I hope this journey proves to be fruitful for you. These FOIAs take freaking forever but man.... I am ready to see the data that they produce. Fingers crossed.
 
I just received an email from my MDG Command. They are referring me for a Non-Duty DES. @Guardguy11 I saw you were saved by the 8 Year Rule. Did your process follow this same track? I feel that I am going to need to get an attorney.
 
A non-duty DES is complete bullshit. Yes, I was literally and figuratively saved by the single statement "8-year rule applies" which was typed onto the NGB signature block of my NILOD-NSA LOD. If you qualify for this important caveat, you need to fight like hell to get that added to your LOD.
 
Here is where I am at. 30 SEPT I received a Memorandum that was authored in my name, but I did not draft it. They called it a "Statement of Selection." In the memo, I agree that my conditions are not duty related, and that I would only be going through a DES for a fitness determination. I could forgo the DES and be involuntarily separated/retired with no disability compensation benefits. Failure to make an election is an election to be separated. Failure to sign is an election to be separated.

I have conditions that have been deemed ILOD, and I have some conditions deemed NILOD-EPTS-NSA. I signed the memo after striking out anything that said "non-duty." Above the signature block I put in a handwritten note that basically said I am signing this under duress on the threat of involuntary separation. I also stated that I'm invoking 10 USC 1207a. I sent it back and I did not hear anything.

In the meantime I contacted my Senator. I drafted an email explaining what has been transpiring over the last 3 years to culminate in being involuntarily separated. I laid out my case for violation of AFI36-2910 and federal law under US Code Title 10, Subtitle A, Part III, Chapter 61, Sections 1201, 1207a, and 1216a. They sent off an inquiry, and within a week I received a call from my commander. He told me that by contacting my Senator it is not having the effect I thought it would. He said it only hastened the process, and they are trying to get me out sooner. I told him at this point all I wanted was something on the record showing that I alerted my command of Federal Law, and they chose to violate it. I told him that I can be ignored, but a congressional inquiry cannot. Well not even a day later after the phone call with my commander, I am no longer being forced out through a non duty des. They are now sending up a Prior Service Condition packet. The packet instructions have a 8 year rule section in them, Surprise, Surprise. My commander filled out the impact statement on his end and forwarded it to me. It left off my EPTS conditions so I added them myself in the service member's remarks section as well as reiterated the Federal Law in the remarks block. After taking L's for the last 3 years this is a small W. I'll take it. I do not know what the PSC process will look like, but I know it gets me to the IPEB. At least now if I lose my BCMR appeal will be very strong. Never stop fighting or advocating for yourself, bc nobody else will.

Never, Never, Never give up in anything great nor small.
 
Great to hear this, Nomad...you are right, always fight to the end for yourself. No one else cares.

Sounds like a big W to me!
 
ANG/NGB & AFRC LOD, MEDCON, IDES Wrongs & Injustices



Violations of law and regulations regarding LODs, MEDCON, IDES have attention at the highest levels of the US Govt NOW!



Read this Reddit post. ANG/NGB and AFRC are violating law constantly to deny LODs, MEDCON, IDES. See links to file IG reprisal complaint and Congressional Oversight whistleblower complaint. These offices are directly engaged!



View: https://www.reddit.com/r/airnationalguard/comments/112fz9a/wrongs_and_injustices_in_the_lod_process/




Department of Defense Office of Inspector General > Components > Administrative Investigations > Whistleblower Reprisal Investigations > Whistleblower Reprisal



 
And, while I am HOT on this topic, let me hit on the most immediate error in the AFI:

"1.1. The Line of Duty (LOD) Determination and its Objective. An illness, injury, disease or death sustained by a member while in a qualified duty status is presumed in the line of duty (ILOD). The burden of proof is with the Department of the Air Force to overcome the presumption. There are different standards of proof for the Department of the Air Force to overcome presumption based on order duration (see paragraph 1.9 and Table 1.1). Members must provide timely medical documentation that the illness, injury, disease or death that occurred while in that duty status."

Why does the member have to provide that documentation? The AF is required to maintain medical records on Airmen. I think this is BS- the only case where a member must provide this is when a LOD investigation has shown that this is in doubt. The second bolded part is essentially stating that there is no presumption. Complete BS.

And, while I am HOT on this topic, let me hit on the most immediate error in the AFI:

"1.1. The Line of Duty (LOD) Determination and its Objective. An illness, injury, disease or death sustained by a member while in a qualified duty status is presumed in the line of duty (ILOD). The burden of proof is with the Department of the Air Force to overcome the presumption. There are different standards of proof for the Department of the Air Force to overcome presumption based on order duration (see paragraph 1.9 and Table 1.1). Members must provide timely medical documentation that the illness, injury, disease or death that occurred while in that duty status."

Why does the member have to provide that documentation? The AF is required to maintain medical records on Airmen. I think this is BS- the only case where a member must provide this is when a LOD investigation has shown that this is in doubt. The second bolded part is essentially stating that there is no presumption. Complete BS.

The military departments certainly appear to be abusing the non-duty related process to avoid awarding the appropriate disability retired pay or other benefits to members of the Reserve Components, including the National Guard.

In case you are not already aware of it, the National Veterans Legal Services Program has a pending class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Beasley et al. v. Del Toro, No. 1:22-cv-00667, which challenges the Navy’s unlawful practice of using the non-duty related process to separate Reservists with disabilities in the absence of a Line of Duty Benefits Letter regardless of evidence presented by the Reservists that their unfitting medical conditions were incurred or aggravated during a period of active duty service greater than 30 days. According to the complaint, “the Navy has made it impossible for disabled Reservists seeking to enter the DES to obtain a Line of Duty Benefits Letter. The Navy has not adopted any regulations or issued any guidance explaining how to obtain such a letter, nor has the Navy specified any standards by which such Letters are issued.” A copy of the complaint is attached. Recently, the United States has moved for a voluntary remand of the case, claiming that the Navy has instituted new procedures to remedy this issue with regard to the two named lead plaintiffs. The plaintiffs oppose the motion characterizing it as an improper attempt to avoid a class action by picking off the named plaintiffs and contending that the Navy has not, in fact, instituted any meaningful or readily ascertainable remedy for the NDR issues raised in the complaint. A copy of the plaintiff’s opposition to the defendant’s remand motion is also attached.

I currently have two NDR cases pending before the ABCMR and am preparing another one, all of which involve circumstances where the US Army Human Resources Command, acting through its Army Reserve Medical Management Center, improperly referred Reservists for NDR separations and then refused to re-refer the cases to the IDES when the Reservists presented evidence at the NDR PEB formal hearing that their medical conditions were duty-related based on binding conclusory opinions from the HRC LOD office. I also have a similar case pending cross MJARs before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
 

Attachments

ANG/NGB & AFRC LOD, MEDCON, IDES Wrongs & Injustices



Violations of law and regulations regarding LODs, MEDCON, IDES have attention at the highest levels of the US Govt NOW!



Read this Reddit post. ANG/NGB and AFRC are violating law constantly to deny LODs, MEDCON, IDES. See links to file IG reprisal complaint and Congressional Oversight whistleblower complaint. These offices are directly engaged!



View: https://www.reddit.com/r/airnationalguard/comments/112fz9a/wrongs_and_injustices_in_the_lod_process/




Department of Defense Office of Inspector General > Components > Administrative Investigations > Whistleblower Reprisal Investigations > Whistleblower Reprisal



Thank you for sharing this information!
 
The military departments certainly appear to be abusing the non-duty related process to avoid awarding the appropriate disability retired pay or other benefits to members of the Reserve Components, including the National Guard.

In case you are not already aware of it, the National Veterans Legal Services Program has a pending class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Beasley et al. v. Del Toro, No. 1:22-cv-00667, which challenges the Navy’s unlawful practice of using the non-duty related process to separate Reservists with disabilities in the absence of a Line of Duty Benefits Letter regardless of evidence presented by the Reservists that their unfitting medical conditions were incurred or aggravated during a period of active duty service greater than 30 days. According to the complaint, “the Navy has made it impossible for disabled Reservists seeking to enter the DES to obtain a Line of Duty Benefits Letter. The Navy has not adopted any regulations or issued any guidance explaining how to obtain such a letter, nor has the Navy specified any standards by which such Letters are issued.” A copy of the complaint is attached. Recently, the United States has moved for a voluntary remand of the case, claiming that the Navy has instituted new procedures to remedy this issue with regard to the two named lead plaintiffs. The plaintiffs oppose the motion characterizing it as an improper attempt to avoid a class action by picking off the named plaintiffs and contending that the Navy has not, in fact, instituted any meaningful or readily ascertainable remedy for the NDR issues raised in the complaint. A copy of the plaintiff’s opposition to the defendant’s remand motion is also attached.

I currently have two NDR cases pending before the ABCMR and am preparing another one, all of which involve circumstances where the US Army Human Resources Command, acting through its Army Reserve Medical Management Center, improperly referred Reservists for NDR separations and then refused to re-refer the cases to the IDES when the Reservists presented evidence at the NDR PEB formal hearing that their medical conditions were duty-related based on binding conclusory opinions from the HRC LOD office. I also have a similar case pending cross MJARs before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
The military departments certainly appear to be abusing the non-duty related process to avoid awarding the appropriate disability retired pay or other benefits to members of the Reserve Components, including the National Guard.

In case you are not already aware of it, the National Veterans Legal Services Program has a pending class action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Beasley et al. v. Del Toro, No. 1:22-cv-00667, which challenges the Navy’s unlawful practice of using the non-duty related process to separate Reservists with disabilities in the absence of a Line of Duty Benefits Letter regardless of evidence presented by the Reservists that their unfitting medical conditions were incurred or aggravated during a period of active duty service greater than 30 days. According to the complaint, “the Navy has made it impossible for disabled Reservists seeking to enter the DES to obtain a Line of Duty Benefits Letter. The Navy has not adopted any regulations or issued any guidance explaining how to obtain such a letter, nor has the Navy specified any standards by which such Letters are issued.” A copy of the complaint is attached. Recently, the United States has moved for a voluntary remand of the case, claiming that the Navy has instituted new procedures to remedy this issue with regard to the two named lead plaintiffs. The plaintiffs oppose the motion characterizing it as an improper attempt to avoid a class action by picking off the named plaintiffs and contending that the Navy has not, in fact, instituted any meaningful or readily ascertainable remedy for the NDR issues raised in the complaint. A copy of the plaintiff’s opposition to the defendant’s remand motion is also attached.

I currently have two NDR cases pending before the ABCMR and am preparing another one, all of which involve circumstances where the US Army Human Resources Command, acting through its Army Reserve Medical Management Center, improperly referred Reservists for NDR separations and then refused to re-refer the cases to the IDES when the Reservists presented evidence at the NDR PEB formal hearing that their medical conditions were duty-related based on binding conclusory opinions from the HRC LOD office. I also have a similar case pending cross MJARs before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
hh
Thank you for sharing this information!
Thank you for the great information I'm a Army Reservist who just recently had my Formal PEB hearing I was already found unfit for my conditions but what I want is service connection because my unit submitted the 2173 but after 2 weeks it was returned for correction which they never did a month went by it was closed for inactivity the VA denied compensation because there was no LOD the PEB members in my hearing indicated that I have enough documentation for HRC to make it service connected if it does not happen can I reach out to you I already had to surgeries and my wrist is not better it's worst. they wanted to give me disability severance because for my Diabetes i got 20% but 0 for my wrist and elbow.
 
Screenshot_20230220_104328_Gallery.jpg
Just going to add this in as well (Attached, not sure if it'll help anyone), this if from the Army PEB, and I was told there was no way around it, but it was used to determine my medical separation that lead to medical retirement, but PTSD was approved as a LOD for that medical retirement determination at 70% DoD disability.

If you need more folks to support this you can add my name down: just shoot me a PM or find me on Tap Talk.

The VA determined IBS "service connected", before the MEB/PEB process begun, so the VA has me covered on IBS at 60% rated as IBS-D.

IBS was a big fight with the VA, but I got it done with VFW help.

I'm an Army Reservist / National Guard Veteran Retired and Disabled 100% P&T.

I also don't need my situation to be resolved, because I have it solved by the VA and that PEBLO can kiss my backside, respectfully.

Respectfully,
Another SM
 
hh

Thank you for the great information I'm a Army Reservist who just recently had my Formal PEB hearing I was already found unfit for my conditions but what I want is service connection because my unit submitted the 2173 but after 2 weeks it was returned for correction which they never did a month went by it was closed for inactivity the VA denied compensation because there was no LOD the PEB members in my hearing indicated that I have enough documentation for HRC to make it service connected if it does not happen can I reach out to you I already had to surgeries and my wrist is not better it's worst. they wanted to give me disability severance because for my Diabetes i got 20% but 0 for my wrist and elbow.

Please file the Reprisal Whistle-Blower IG Complaint. They are denying you due process by failing to initiate the required LODs. The reprisals are denial of pay, benefits, and treatment. You can do this on top of consulting with an attorney as they are separate processes. They want to give you severance and get rid of you because if you are DOD 30% then things have to go a different route. They know this.
 
Bringing this post back from the dead with an update:

It's been a while since I posted on this thread. I was recommended to the MEB, and I have already had an IPEB completed. The IPEB results were not great. I was rated at 20% for only my shoulder. The IPEB did not consider my heart condition, and they obviously would not consider the other conditions that were NILOD. These NILOD conditions were originally finalized as ILOD, and then NGB overturned the determination and made them NILOD. I disagreed with the IPEB, and I requested an FPEB. MY ODC lawyer decided to defer the FPEB to submit a SAF appeal to have the NILOD conditions restored to ILOD. I had a letter from a board certified neurologist that stated my condition started in service, and that it was caused by my service. We also highlighted all the violations of law and policy in the appeal to the SAF.

Today while logging into my mil email from home I saw that I had an email from AFPC stating that I had an FPEB scheduled for 4AUG. There was no other information. I figured that the SAF had made a decision, so I contacted my ODC lawyer. He started off the conversation stating that he is not going to sugar coat it. He said we lost the appeal. He went on to say that my appeal was with a batch of 8 others. All were denied, and all were exact copy and past explanations except for name and condition. The copy and paste was so bad that they spliced sentences into sentences, and they cut off the conclusion part of my decision.

I asked my ODC if they are required to furnish the evidence used to make their denial. He asked me if I wanted the lawful answer or the "how they do it answer." I told him I wanted both. He told me of course they are not only supposed to make the decision based on evidence, but they do have to provide it to me. He then said the real way it happens is that my evidence was not even looked at. Some staffers with a pile of appeals just decides yay or nay and moves on to the next one.

So, I am now going into an fpeb with the forlorn conclusion that I will 100% lose it. Since it is the end of the line as far as the MEB process, I am going in guns ablazing (Metaphorically). The truth of the matter is that the DODI states that I am to be provided with all the evidence used to deny me pre, during, and post MEB. I am going to grill them on that so I have them on record saying that they do not have any evidence, and I am going to argue lack of effective representation. How can my ODC adequately represent me or even formulate an defense when we are fighting ghost evidence? He has told me many times that the board does whatever they please, and we have to play by their rules. I am working on a cheat sheet of USC, DODI, and DAFI so that I can rebut any points they try to make with doctrine, law, and policy. I know it is going to be an effort in vain, but I am still fighting the long war of BCMR and possibly bringing suit.
 
Bringing this post back from the dead with an update:

It's been a while since I posted on this thread. I was recommended to the MEB, and I have already had an IPEB completed. The IPEB results were not great. I was rated at 20% for only my shoulder. The IPEB did not consider my heart condition, and they obviously would not consider the other conditions that were NILOD. These NILOD conditions were originally finalized as ILOD, and then NGB overturned the determination and made them NILOD. I disagreed with the IPEB, and I requested an FPEB. MY ODC lawyer decided to defer the FPEB to submit a SAF appeal to have the NILOD conditions restored to ILOD. I had a letter from a board certified neurologist that stated my condition started in service, and that it was caused by my service. We also highlighted all the violations of law and policy in the appeal to the SAF.

Today while logging into my mil email from home I saw that I had an email from AFPC stating that I had an FPEB scheduled for 4AUG. There was no other information. I figured that the SAF had made a decision, so I contacted my ODC lawyer. He started off the conversation stating that he is not going to sugar coat it. He said we lost the appeal. He went on to say that my appeal was with a batch of 8 others. All were denied, and all were exact copy and past explanations except for name and condition. The copy and paste was so bad that they spliced sentences into sentences, and they cut off the conclusion part of my decision.

I asked my ODC if they are required to furnish the evidence used to make their denial. He asked me if I wanted the lawful answer or the "how they do it answer." I told him I wanted both. He told me of course they are not only supposed to make the decision based on evidence, but they do have to provide it to me. He then said the real way it happens is that my evidence was not even looked at. Some staffers with a pile of appeals just decides yay or nay and moves on to the next one.

So, I am now going into an fpeb with the forlorn conclusion that I will 100% lose it. Since it is the end of the line as far as the MEB process, I am going in guns ablazing (Metaphorically). The truth of the matter is that the DODI states that I am to be provided with all the evidence used to deny me pre, during, and post MEB. I am going to grill them on that so I have them on record saying that they do not have any evidence, and I am going to argue lack of effective representation. How can my ODC adequately represent me or even formulate an defense when we are fighting ghost evidence? He has told me many times that the board does whatever they please, and we have to play by their rules. I am working on a cheat sheet of USC, DODI, and DAFI so that I can rebut any points they try to make with doctrine, law, and policy. I know it is going to be an effort in vain, but I am still fighting the long war of BCMR and possibly bringing suit.
Dude....this enrages me. I am so sorry they are putting you through this. I hope you have already started you AFBCMR paperwork. They seem to actually read the evidence and should overturn this nonsense. It just sucks you have to fight sooo hard for the law to be upheld.
 
Dude....this enrages me. I am so sorry they are putting you through this. I hope you have already started you AFBCMR paperwork. They seem to actually read the evidence and should overturn this nonsense. It just sucks you have to fight sooo hard for the law to be upheld.
AFBCMR is taking double the stated time. I put in one in FEB 22 and it's still in the works today;-(

@nomad TACP, let's link up in the next few days. I haven't read your stuff yet but don't want you going into this blind.
 
AFBCMR is taking double the stated time. I put in one in FEB 22 and it's still in the works today;-(

@nomad TACP, let's link up in the next few days. I haven't read your stuff yet but don't want you going into this blind.
Hawaii, if you are back in the game now that you are settled, @retiredguy is really making some good head way into bringing the fight to their doorstep and needs more people with data points he can use as evidence fodder for battle. You should e-mail him at [email protected] and see how you can add your shit show to the pile to help.
 
AFBCMR is taking double the stated time. I put in one in FEB 22 and it's still in the works today;-(

@nomad TACP, let's link up in the next few days. I haven't read your stuff yet but don't want you going into this blind.
Thanks for reaching out. I need all the help I can get. This whole process has been me learning USC, DODI, DAFI, and then realizing that it is not followed at all by the AF. My schedule is wide open whenever you have time. Thank you.
 
Top