A second "new" informal finding.

Not sure how this happened, a PEBLO contacted me about a month to go over my IPEB findings. But another PEBLO contact again, a couple of days ago. We were both confused about why the IPEB reviewed my case again.
The only difference on the "new" IPEB finding document is "PDIR" next to my name in block 1, does anyone know what it means?
Interesting that both "old" and "new" document is reviewed and signed off by different board members.

Currently, I'm waiting to get an FPEB date for also about a month, not sure how this event will make a difference.

 

[SeaTurtle]

Not sure how this happened, a PEBLO contacted me about a month to go over my IPEB findings. But another PEBLO contact again, a couple of days ago. We were both confused about why the IPEB reviewed my case again.
The only difference on the "new" IPEB finding document is "PDIR" next to my name in block 1, does anyone know what it means?
Interesting that both "old" and "new" document is reviewed and signed off by different board members.

Currently, I'm waiting to get an FPEB date for also about a month, not sure how this event will make a difference.

From what I understand you should absolutely have a FPEB date by now.
From the army perspective, I was given a FPEB date within 3 days of making that election on my 199.

Legal explained to me that because of the large amount of FPEB’s being requested the IPEB may reevaluate their findings and takes into consideration your written appeal and any other new evidence. That is why you may have been given a new or different 199.

 

[a2421960839]

From what I understand you should absolutely have a FPEB date by now.
From the army perspective, I was given a FPEB date within 3 days of making that election on my 199.

Legal explained to me that because of the large amount of FPEB’s being requested the IPEB may reevaluate their findings and takes into consideration your written appeal and any other new evidence. That is why you may have been given a new or different 199.

I was told by the PEBLO that the wait time for FPEB date is about 1 to 2 months.
If that's the case why IPEB review my case again, then they should've asked me if I have additional materials, because they messed up my ratings on the first one.
The whole reason why I'm still waiting for FPEB is because the IPEB attorney said they don't have the manpower right to help me do VARR, and I should request for FPEB so I can get help from a FPEB attorney.

 

[SeaTurtle]

I was told by the PEBLO that the wait time for FPEB date is about 1 to 2 months.
If that's the case why IPEB review my case again, then they should've asked me if I have additional materials, because they messed up my ratings on the first one.
The whole reason why I'm still waiting for FPEB is because the IPEB attorney said they don't have the manpower right to help me do VARR, and I should request for FPEB so I can get help from a FPEB attorney.

What is your branch and duty station?

When the IPEB findings concluded you should have been presented with a 199 and given a few different options to elect.

It sounds as though you elected to do the FPEB, a written appeal should’ve gone forward with that election. Also, legal should’ve been made available to you so you could ask these questions and get guidance for your election.

I highly recommend you reach out to a your available ides legal team, or a civilian lawyer at this point. You should already have a date for your FPEB and you should be gathering any additional medical evidence you can to include in the FPEB.

It sounds like you’ve encountered a few lazy individuals who don’t want to do their job. It makes it incredibly difficult for us, but ultimately puts the ownership on us to educate ourselves and learn the regulations and process so they can’t tell us what to do.

There are a few extremely knowledgeable members of the forum who know good legal teams that I might consider contacting if I was you. @chaplaincharlie is among the best of them!

 

[a2421960839]

The IDES attorney was the one who recommended FPEB to me, I have already reached out to a civilian lawyer, John B. Gately, who I heard was pretty good at cases like this.
I have contacted the PEBLO and IDES attorney serval times in many different ways, but all they reply is telling me to wait for the FPEB.
Not sure how John does stuff, but after the initial consultation and submitting the necessary documents, I was not able to get in contact with him.
All this together left me thinking do I like REALLY need to wait till I got the FPEB date for everything to start? Giving me anxiety issues with all these "miscommunications".

 

[johnbgately]

Actually, I did respond to you by voicemail this week, in between hearings. I do not normally respond publicly on the forum for pending cases but will outline a general response regarding the conversation we just had, as this question may affect other Navy and Marine Corps members.

1. Your case is a Navy case, thus Sea Turtle's response is inapplicable given that his case was an Army board. For Sea Turtle, Navy IDES attorneys, unfortunately, do not send in an IPEB Reconsideration request automatically as Army IDES attorneys do. And, bonus, the Navy PEB does not automatically review IPEB Recon requests at the present time. Finally, the Navy IDES counsel at NMC Portsmouth is short-staffed and cannot handle their current caseload. Thus, they referred the member on to the FPEB - not to actually have him go to a formal board, but to buy the time to have a Code 16 attorney at the Yard to see if he or she could help him to draft a VARR and pull the formal request. And, unfortunately, a well-intentioned PEBLO simply advised him to wait for the Formal Board. What he really meant was to wait until you have counsel assigned from the Formal Board and let him or her reassess the case. The PEBLO in question did not know that he already had counsel and that this situation was well in hand.

2. For my client, that being said, my plan remains the same. We are not going to an FPEB. We are using the FPEB request in order to have the additional time to do a VARR and will pull the FPEB request when it is done. This is because the issue is the frequency and severity of your condition- which has to be addressed by a VARR, not an FPEB. Before we submit the VARR and pull the FPEB request, there are several points that your specialty provider will need to clarify. He apparently thinks that the key points are covered in the NarSum, but they are not. I have dealt with your provider before- he is a great guy, and very accommodating. What he will have to do for us will only require about a half hour of his time, but clearly defining the frequency and severity of the disorder using particular terminology and pointing out a few errors in the VA C& P exams will make a difference. He has done this for me before in a recent case within the past year. Note- given your Genesis data only does back to 2023, I will need you to request an electronic copy of your NCMP records through 2022.

3. In addition I have requested a copy of the TRIM file- the Navy PEB case file and we should have that in hand by Tuesday. It will be sent to me by Ms. Jones- the records admin staffer at the Navy PEB- via DOD Safe in Adobe Portfolio format. And I will share it with you on our shared drive.

v/r

Jack Gately

P.S. For Sea Turtle, the additional findings were simply an administrative correction and did not represent an IPEB recon.

 

[johnbgately]

* given that your Genesis data only goes back (not does back) to 2023

 

[SeaTurtle]

Actually, I did respond to you by voicemail this week, in between hearings. I do not normally respond publicly on the forum for pending cases but will outline a general response regarding the conversation we just had, as this question may affect other Navy and Marine Corps members.

1. Your case is a Navy case, thus Sea Turtle's response is inapplicable given that his case was an Army board. For Sea Turtle, Navy IDES attorneys, unfortunately, do not send in an IPEB Reconsideration request automatically as Army IDES attorneys do. And, bonus, the Navy PEB does not automatically review IPEB Recon requests at the present time. Finally, the Navy IDES counsel at NMC Portsmouth is short-staffed and cannot handle their current caseload. Thus, they referred the member on to the FPEB - not to actually have him go to a formal board, but to buy the time to have a Code 16 attorney at the Yard to see if he or she could help him to draft a VARR and pull the formal request. And, unfortunately, a well-intentioned PEBLO simply advised him to wait for the Formal Board. What he really meant was to wait until you have counsel assigned from the Formal Board and let him or her reassess the case. The PEBLO in question did not know that he already had counsel and that this situation was well in hand.

2. For my client, that being said, my plan remains the same. We are not going to an FPEB. We are using the FPEB request in order to have the additional time to do a VARR and will pull the FPEB request when it is done. This is because the issue is the frequency and severity of your condition- which has to be addressed by a VARR, not an FPEB. Before we submit the VARR and pull the FPEB request, there are several points that your specialty provider will need to clarify. He apparently thinks that the key points are covered in the NarSum, but they are not. I have dealt with your provider before- he is a great guy, and very accommodating. What he will have to do for us will only require about a half hour of his time, but clearly defining the frequency and severity of the disorder using particular terminology and pointing out a few errors in the VA C& P exams will make a difference. He has done this for me before in a recent case within the past year. Note- given your Genesis data only does back to 2023, I will need you to request an electronic copy of your NCMP records through 2022.

3. In addition I have requested a copy of the TRIM file- the Navy PEB case file and we should have that in hand by Tuesday. It will be sent to me by Ms. Jones- the records admin staffer at the Navy PEB- via DOD Safe in Adobe Portfolio format. And I will share it with you on our shared drive.

v/r

Jack Gately

P.S. For Sea Turtle, the additional findings were simply an administrative correction and did not represent an IPEB recon.

Interesting the way it was explained to me is that it was indeed an IPEB reconsideration.

@johnbgately on my returned DA 199, under section I, in the final block, the box that is checked is - Reconsideration # 1.

I can see that Administrative correction is an option, however it is not selected.

 

[johnbgately]

Interesting the way it was explained to me is that it was indeed an IPEB reconsideration.

@johnbgately on my returned DA 199, under section I, in the final block, the box that is checked is - Reconsideration # 1.

I can see that Administrative correction is an option, however it is not selected.

This is a very different and somewhat unique issue, Sea Turtle, as the member's case file had several records from another individual mixed in with his records, including the pivotal VA C&P exams upon which the DOD rating was based. This error was caught during a quick quality review check. Thus, they had to request a new MEB case file and issue a new decision. The member will still require a VARR, as the same VA examiner in the local area inaccurately reflected the symptoms of both members- this is truly an aberration from the norm

 

[SeaTurtle]

This is a very different and somewhat unique issue, Sea Turtle, as the member's case file had several records from another individual mixed in with his records, including the pivotal VA C&P exams upon which the DOD rating was based. This error was caught during a quick quality review check. Thus, they had to request a new MEB case file and issue a new decision. The member will still require a VARR, as the same VA examiner in the local area inaccurately reflected the symptoms of both members- this is truly an aberration from the norm

Oh, understood.
@johnbgately In your original message I misunderstood your p.s. comment and thought you were referring to my situation.