Initial RILO Result- RTD w/ ALC Code-2. MEB not directed, however 2 unfitting conditions

jleef31

PEB Forum Regular Member
Registered Member
Hello all,

Just got my Initial RILO Result from my PEBLO, which ended up being a RTD with an Assignment Limitation Code (ALC)-2. MEB was not directed. I have had/been diagnosed with constant/chronic depersonalization-derealization disorder for about 2 years now, accompanied by anxiety, depression, etc. My other diagnosis is undifferentiated somatoform disorder. Been on meds and actively seeing therapist, PCM, psychologist, psychiatrist for about a year now.

Being in the Air Force, it is my understanding that a CIS (Commander Impact Statement) and NARSUM (Narrative Summary) are submitted with your case when it goes up to AFPC. That is the problem I see. My case was submitted WITHOUT either the CIS nor NARSUM. I never saw or signed anything, and to my knowledge, my doctors are still working on my NARSUM. So I am very confused. What are my options here? Was there an error on my PEBLO submitting my case without either of these pieces? Seems sus to me.

Thanks for the input guys.
 
@jleef31

Legal Assistance attorneys on base should be able to review your case and advise. Based on your diagnoses, tackling this on your own may lead to severe distress/anxiety. I was a Legal Assistance JAG and had a ton of these type of issues come through my office. The key is pointing to the pertinent part of the DAFMAN 48-108, Paragraph 2.4. Initial Review-In-Lieu-Of (IRILO), and discussing why you believe there were missteps. Most importantly, ensure you bring evidence to corroborate your claims; otherwise, you'll just be told to go retrieve it and come back for another appointment so you can have a substantive discussion not based on speculation.

I hope this helps.

S/f,

Joel

Disclosure: I was a Marine JAG, Active Duty and Reserve IPEB & FPEB attorney, federal government civilian FPEB & TDRL-focused attorney at the Navy PEB, and now a private attorney focused solely on IDES cases at Joel Pettit Law. This post is meant as procedural insight only and should not be construed as legal advice related to a specific case or a legal analysis of facts thereof.
 
@jleef31

Legal Assistance attorneys on base should be able to review your case and advise. Based on your diagnoses, tackling this on your own may lead to severe distress/anxiety. I was a Legal Assistance JAG and had a ton of these type of issues come through my office. The key is pointing to the pertinent part of the DAFMAN 48-108, Paragraph 2.4. Initial Review-In-Lieu-Of (IRILO), and discussing why you believe there were missteps. Most importantly, ensure you bring evidence to corroborate your claims; otherwise, you'll just be told to go retrieve it and come back for another appointment so you can have a substantive discussion not based on speculation.

I hope this helps.

S/f,

Joel

Disclosure: I was a Marine JAG, Active Duty and Reserve IPEB & FPEB attorney, federal government civilian FPEB & TDRL-focused attorney at the Navy PEB, and now a private attorney focused solely on IDES cases at Joel Pettit Law. This post is meant as procedural insight only and should not be construed as legal advice related to a specific case or a legal analysis of facts thereof.
Thank you so much for your input Joel. Today, my PEBLO explained that they sent up a “modified” IRILO package due to me being close to my DOS (2 months away). I was also reading DAFMAN 48-108, Paragraph 2.4, and did not see anything about a modified IRILO package. Have you ever heard of a modified IRILO package? Seems disingenuous and out-of-the-ordinary to not send up all information possible to AFPC, so that they can explain thoroughly the severity of my diagnoses. I will get in touch with my base attorneys.
 
Frankly, I have never heard of a modified IRILO package. When I see "modified" anything in the IDES, I ask the person providing the adjective where they are given the authority to submit a modified filing. Although his or her motives might be laudable, remember: the road to Hell is paved with good intensions.
 
It would be interesting to get a copy of the medical file the decision maker (not withstanding @JoelPettit 's input) had when making the decision.
 
Frankly, I have never heard of a modified IRILO package. When I see "modified" anything in the IDES, I ask the person providing the adjective where they are given the authority to submit a modified filing. Although his or her motives might be laudable, remember: the road to Hell is paved with good intensions.

You're very right Joel, the road to Hell is indeed paved with good intensions. I did a deep dive into the AFI, and I did end up being wrong and seeing the modified RILO being an acceptable form of filing to AFPC. I did not however, see specific reasoning to submit a modified RILO in the first place. Nonetheless, I've been extremely wary toward my PEBLO due to this, even though it seems they have my best interest at heart. My psychiatrist and the AMRO board President are both very frustrated with the outcome, and are currently reaching out to AFPC to go to bat for me to enter a full MEB. I will get an answer this week.

I've been in the military for a while, but man, I can't help but question the bureaucracy of this entire process. I bet there have been a lot of troops that have been severely burned by the AF/DoD medical board process.
 
It would be interesting to get a copy of the medical file the decision maker (not withstanding @JoelPettit 's input) had when making the decision.

Good insight chaplaincharlie, I will have to request that medical file. I am just absolutely bewildered that big AF can just squash someone's serious medical issues, even when the local medical professionals are adamant that the member should absolutely not be retained and should be compensated. I wouldn't wish this disorder on my worst enemy. Due process, I guess.
 
Paperwork errors occur.
 
Top