Added medical documentation after C&P

T

thman558

PEB Forum Regular Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
Hey guys,

I completed my general C&P exam and read the physicians write up. I was very upset and disagreed with a lot of the information he wrote. Well I found out that there was 120+ pages of my medical records that were missing with my package. I was able to recoup the missing pages from my specialty clinics and forward the documentation to both my Peblo and MSC. My package got sent up today for ratings, but I'm not sure how this will play out. I haven't heard back from my MSC, but I'm wondering if the DRO will review the added records which were absent from my C&P or if they will allow me another C&P exam. I talked to the IDES coordinator and they mentioned it's usually a case by case basis. I'm always thinking I can file a NOD as well... Has anyone had experience like this?
 
You can't file a NOD until there is a decision to disagree with. The official decision that you can NOD against is the rating after you separate. A VARR may help if the rating for an unfit conditions comes back wrong, at which point you can spell out what evidence you believe points to the rating you do agree with.

The rater is supposed to review all medical records, not just the C&P. It is quite possible, with the now complete package, he will come to the correct conclusion. Alternatively, he may look at the medical records, see how nothing makes sense now, and order a new C&P exam that answers the rating question appropriately. Its hard to guess, as there is no real clue to what was wrong with the C&P exam and how the specialty clinic records help clarify the error. If it was a simply problem with diagnosis, probably everything is fine. If it was a problem with the C&P not even bothering to measure how severe the problem is now, likely a new C&P exam is needed. In the later case, it may be worthwhile to download the relevant DBQ and have a doc fill it out, to provide a solid rebuttal to the C&P exam.

Its worth mentioning that some errors on the C&P may be unimportant. Many portions of the DBQ they fill out aren't going to be relevant in determining your rating. Sometimes examiners will put in BS for those sections, greatly abbreviate them, or whatever, and it won't flush out to be an actual problem. For example, on a mental health exam, there is only a single sentence that really has to do with the rating. They may leave out large portions of your conversation, but as long as they get that single sentence right, it may not matter. Even if they rename your PTSD, anxiety disorder NOS, don't mention some of your more severe symptoms, it can still all come out ok, as long as that single sentence is correct and they don't rename it personality disorder.
 
Scout,

I really appreciate your response.. I reviewed the DBQ's that the C&P examiner completed and what worries me is there are quotes he used such as, "Veteran states he does not have... Sx's" when in reality I never made those statements. Additionally, my records state I lost 60lbs from my gastro issues, but on my DBQ he states I lost no weight.. Those are just some of the issues and there are many more... So I'm hoping the rating officer scopes the record and sees the inconsistencies in the C&P examiners statements. I'll keep you updated, my MSC also stated to wait for the ratings. He has seen multiple times were someone has a good C&P exam, however they receive bad ratings.. And other instances where there is a bad C&P exam, but the ratings return better than anticipated. I'll just wait and see! Thanks again
 
I agreed with the NARSUM, it was accurate and my PCM did a great job. I didn't agree with the C&P examiners DBQ's he conducted. I didn't take anything to legal yet.. The only document I have signed thus far was the AF 618 and impartial review which came back from the board as unfit which listed all my unfitting conditions. I have been advised to wait for my ratings and go from there..
 
The NARSUM also includes the QTC appointments atleast army does it that way, I took that whole packet to legal before i signed it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top