NGB LOD FOIA request

Guardguy11

Super Moderator
Staff Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
452
Got my initial response letter to my freedom of information act. They say it will take approximately 2 years to complete…. Good grief. Well at some point in 2023, I promise I will analyze the data to see if my assumptions about the corrupt behavior of NGB/DN2DP (medical standards branch) is warranted. If they truly get me the data I requested, I believe I will be able to make a report that will have my senator beat down that door over at NGB. Here are the questions I asked (I made several requests over a couple weeks and they just grouped them together):


1. How many Line of Duty (LOD) determinations were made in year 2020 by the National Guard Bureau (NGB)/DN2DP and how many were found not in the LOD (Portal Request #210321), (This was my first request before I decided to increase the scope to 5 years)

2. How many appeals for denial of an in-LOD determination did NGB receive from 2016 through 2020; to include how many appeals resulted in a change of determination (Portal Request #210421),

3. How many LOD determination appeals were submitted to NGB from 2016 through 2020; to include how many appeals resulted in a change of determination (Portal Request #210411),

4. How many LOD forms received by NGB were adjudicated or determined not be service aggravated, existed prior to service, or both from 2016 through 2020 (Portal Request #210431),

5. How many administrative LOD determinations were made by the NGB not counting formal investigations and how many LODs were listed as existed prior to service and/or not service aggravated between 2016 through 2020 (Portal Request #214911)

6. What was the average processing time for administrative LOD determinations received by NGB from 2016 through 2020 (Portal Request #214921).
Items 1 through 4 were received on April 14, 2021 and items 5 and 6 were received by NGB on May 1, 2021. Because these items are similar in nature, they have been aggregated into one request, which has been assigned
 

Guardguy11

Super Moderator
Staff Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
452
I am open to hearing your comments and thoughts on this. I will refer back to this post in two years…. When I start working on the data analysis and conclusion report.
 

Guardguy11

Super Moderator
Staff Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
452
If I had known it was going to take two years to complete I would have asked for data from 2021 as well…
 

Guardguy11

Super Moderator
Staff Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
452
I suppose for the sake of conversation, it is worth stating my “hunch” about DN2DP.

My theory about DN2DP is that they are denying far more LODs than the DODI / AR / AFI supports. They are doing this for several reasons. Saving money, saving paperwork, and saving man power. All at the expense of the service member. They have a God like power and responsibility and at some point, the office, or perhaps individuals in that office, became jaded to the onslaught of LODs. The war on terror was so much, that this office was not able to properly analyze each case the way it needed and as such, thousands of Guardsmen have been thrown to the wolves.

We will see if the data supports any of this conjecture. If this forum is to be taken as any form of sample size, I believe it will.
 
Last edited:

Guardguy11

Super Moderator
Staff Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
452
If anyone has had a LOD denied that they felt was incorrect AND are willing to give me details about your situation, I would love to add it to my source materials for my paper. Feel free to DM me if you don't feel comfortable posting it in the general forum.
 

Hawaii5-0

Well-Known Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
67
@Hawaii5-0, I would love to get your opinion on this.
Sorry i was off the site for a few months.

Ohhhh I have many opinions on this matter. NGB is undermanned at all times and there seems to be a thought that they get props for being 50% manned. To me that is not working smarter...just harder.

Most LOD denials (99%) are not well researched. Their denials contain generic wording. They don't include specifics about how they determine that a disease process isn't ILOD. Oddly, they often feel the need to overturn the AD MDG LODs that contain the AD MDG,CC, JAG, General officer signatures. One would logically think that an LOD that went through the AD routing and was determined to be ILOD would be sufficient. But, alas we must remember that ARC forces are second class citizens. In this particular instance, the AD is validating us as a true member and the ARC LOD peeps almost always overrule that decision...especially in the NGB world.

Because they have the power they can get the 2 star to sign off on rebuttals pretty quick. Internally, they do no wrong. BUT if any of these go to a BCMR or to federal court...they would be overturned that same 99% of the time. I have the verbiage in my cheat sheet in the references area...i'll try to find it and post again.
 
Last edited:

Hawaii5-0

Well-Known Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
67
While this language is geared toward the PEB....and you need a valid LOD to enter the PEB....this would stand in court. The ARC LODs are NOT taking this into account. Sadly spending most of my career in operations/staff work...I have been naïve by thinking that all in the uniform are SME's for their particular job. I have now found that most don't read the higher level guidance that instruct the services to carry out their duties.

Simply put...the ARC LOD denials DO NOT overcome clear and unmistakable evidence to overturn ILOD determinations.

DoDI 1332.38:
"E3.P4.5.2.2. After Entry
E3.P4.5.2.2.1. Presumption of Sound Condition for members ordered on active duty for more than thirty days. This presumption applies in all cases in which a member, on active duty for more than 30 days is found to have a disability and the disability was not noted at the time of the member’s entrance on active duty. This presumption is overcome if clear and unmistakable evidence demonstrates that the disability existed before the
Service member’s entrance on active duty and was not aggravated by military service. Absent such clear and unmistakable evidence, the PEB will conclude that the disability was incurred or aggravated during military service."
 
Last edited:

Hawaii5-0

Well-Known Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
67
Meant to write..."ARC LOD denials DO NOT GENERALLY overcome clear and unmistakable evidence to overturn ILOD determinations.
 

Strigidae

PEB Forum Regular Member
Registered Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2020
Messages
8
So, I was reading through last month’s revision to AFI 36-2910, and there’s a change that is relevant to this conversation.

For informal LODs in the Guard, the Wing Commander is now the appointing/approving authority. NGB no longer has any say in the LOD determination (unless you wanted to appeal the Wing CCs decision). Formal LODs still go to NGB.
36D27DFC-7C23-4078-A7D9-47681E64F8F0.jpeg
 

Provis

Moderator
Joined
Feb 2, 2020
Messages
471
So, I was reading through last month’s revision to AFI 36-2910, and there’s a change that is relevant to this conversation.

For informal LODs in the Guard, the Wing Commander is now the appointing/approving authority. NGB no longer has any say in the LOD determination (unless you wanted to appeal the Wing CCs decision). Formal LODs still go to NGB.
View attachment 6966
What's the difference between an informal LOD and a formal one? Is there any benefit to getting one over the other?
 

Strigidae

PEB Forum Regular Member
Registered Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2020
Messages
8
What's the difference between an informal LOD and a formal one? Is there any benefit to getting one over the other?
I’m not 100% sure, to be honest. My guess is that a formal LOD determination is required if there’s possible misconduct involved in the injury.
 

Chalk22

Well-Known Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
45
I’m not 100% sure, to be honest. My guess is that a formal LOD determination is required if there’s possible misconduct involved in the injury.
Informal LOD can be used when there is no intentional misconduct or gross negligence suspected. It can only result in a finding of ILD or EPTS.
 
Top