PULHES and MEB ratings

Discussion in 'Profiles, Duty Limiting Conditions, and LIMDU' started by nwlivewire, Feb 21, 2010.

  1. nwlivewire

    nwlivewire PEB Forum Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    1,768
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Hello!

    I'm trying to gain a better understanding of the PDES process.

    Background:

    Did a web search and found out that the minimum acceptable PULHES for a

    46Q (46Z - E-7) is 323332.

    I could only find one listing for this MOS/rank specific PULHES - so I don't know how accurate this is.

    Where can I find this info in an Army Reg to verify this PULHES coding for my MOS/Rank is accurate?

    Currently, my PULHES profile is 333113

    Question 1: Does tinnitus change the PULHES code H - 1? If so, would the H be a 2, 3? My tinnitus is of recent onset and I am going to be evaluated by an ear doctor soon. But it's driving me nuts!

    Question 2: What conditions will be reviewed by the MEB? Only those that fall below the minimum acceptable PULHES for MOS/rank? Or, do they look at all of the PULHES medical problems regardless of numerical score?

    Question 3: Do the medical issues listed in the NARSUM - and ONLY those issues - drive the MEB evaluation process? Is the NARSUM supposed to list ALL medical issues regardless of whether or not they impact the minimum acceptable PULHES standards for MOS/rank?

    Thank-you for your time on this as I am a bit confused.
  2. Jason Perry

    Jason Perry Site Founder Staff Member PEB Forum Veteran

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    11,082
    Trophy Points:
    1,225
    You can find Army regs here: http://www.apd.army.mil/ . I think you found the minimum requirements for awarding the MOS. I suppose you could use the fact that you fall below the appointment standard as evidence that you can't perform in the duty position and are therefore unfit...but, this is a bit of a tortured way of getting to what you are trying to accomplish (not that I don't understand the idea/impulse behind this....my first week as an assigned JAG at the PEB, I went down this road and discussed the issue with the board members informally). Bottom line, the PULHES will not "automatically" get you to an unfit finding if your functional limitations do not match the PULHES code. In my opinion, it is best to stick to talking about what your disabilities prevent you from doing, rather than on the PULHES (don't get me wrong, PULHES are important in the context of having a 3 for a condition to be likely rated by the PEB...and in conjunction with a good Commander's Letter, can make the outcome much more assured).



    A condition, by itself, usually does not require a certain PULHES code. It is the severity and impact of the condition. Here is an extract I put together from AR 40-501.

    They are supposed to evaluate all medical conditions. However, those that fail retention standards and require an MEB will be given more coverage in the MEB and Narrative Summary (technically, what I described was the way you will see them perform MEBs, but the information for each condition required is standardized).

    The NARSUM gives the PEB the evidence to rate a case. If the NARSUM is deficient and does not provide required information, then in a sense, it does drive the MEB...but, as stated above, they are supposed to cover all medical conditions. As a practical matter, some things are going to be omitted. Whether you fight for their inclusion is a bit of a judgment call...for example, if you have seasonal hay fever that does not impact your duty performance, it probably makes sense to not worry about it. If it does impact your duties, I would say you would want to get that condition included in your MEB.
  3. nwlivewire

    nwlivewire PEB Forum Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    1,768
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Dear Jason:

    Thank-you for your response. Looks like I'm back to reading some more. I sure am glad you have this web site. It has been a god-send to me with the information that has been posted. The timely human responses to real-time situations that come up for us all trying to get through the various stages of this process - I cannot thank ALL of you enough.

    Dear Jason:

    Have you thought about a creating a new poll for those servicemembers who qualify for CRSC, but are not getting their full due? I know in my case, I will eventually qualify for CRSC, but will not see any monetary benefit from this program, due to the way the DoD has set up the mathmatical formula for the calculation of this CRSC compensatory benefit. This half-loaf, stop gap program ends up being a no-loaf, - not even a crumb - of a benefit for me, and to what I suspect, may also end up being a loss of benefit to thousands of other disabled servicemembers. Many are receiving just a dribble of their fullest amount or get nothing at all. I wonder: Why even have this so-called benefit available, the DoD touts this as a benefit - tells us all about how we will get htis when we qualify - and then through technicalities - they don't pay out very much - if at all. What's up with that? It's a joke!

    I wonder if our Congress and Senate is aware of what is going on with this? CRSC benefits - or lack thereof - needs a bright light shined upon it now. We have pending legislation on the Federal level that could use a push to fix this, but I don't think there is a lot of hard data out there to establish the genuine need to fix this. I think the assumption out there is that we have CRSC and it's working - but the reality is that it is NOT working to the benefit of the disabled at all. I can't figure out why the government would allow for such a thing to happen to our military disabled. Somethings not right here.

    Again, thanks to you Jason, and to ALL the other monitors who work so very hard to help us.

    Sincerely,
    nwlivewire

Share This Page