I received a letter today from the Department of the Navy, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards. Unfortunately the the decision was not good and I honestly did not expect otherwise. My case was reviewed by the board and with a 2 to 1 vote they voted in favor of increasing rating from 10% to 30% and placement on the PDRL. The letter states "After thorough review of your case, the Secretary determined the PEB's decision in your case was valid and concurred with the PDBR Minority Opinion, for the reasons stated therein, that your MAJOR DEPRESSION was appropriately rated at 10% under VASRD Code 9439." It appears that the recommendation of the board is just that. It is unfortunate that the decision is final and I now have nothing to do to future my case. The information presented to the board in what I read seems to be inaccurate and only adds to my frustration.
PDBR Results - Not Good - Received Today
- Thread starter James Furmage
- Start date
I apologize for not taking the time to be clear about things. I received the letter and was still in disbelief. I'll start over and give additional information.
I was an active duty submariner in the Navy who served just shy of 12 years. I was separated in April 2007 with a diagnosis of Major Depression Severe Recurring and given a rating of 10% and severance. When I finally received my DD214 I filed my claim with the VA in July 2007 for the condition leading to my separation and the other conditions that were not reviewed during my PEB. I received a rating decision in April 2008 with a decision granting me 50% for my Major Depression and an additional 10% for a issue not reviewed by the PEB. The decision was received within 12 months of discharge. My rating continues with the VA for the two conditions following my review last year. An active duty friend informed me about a news story in late 2007/early 2008 about Lt. Col. Parkers efforts to shed light on the documented problems with ratings review. When I learned the form became available to submit my case for independent review I submitted in early 2010 and received notice that I had not completed something properly and needed to submit paperwork again. I received a letter in October 2010 that my package had been sent to the PDBR for review. Yesterday I received a letter from the Department of the Navy Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards. The letter included the record of proceedings from the PDBR, a letter from the President of the PDBR Retired AF Col. Michael F. LoGrande to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Manpower and Reserve Affairs and a letter from the Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards to me. The recommendation from the President of the PDBR to the Navy was to recharacterize my separation to reflect permanent disability retirement with a combined disability rating of 30% rather than 10%. The letter from the Navy to me said they were not going to accept the recommendation from the President of the PDBR.
I was an active duty submariner in the Navy who served just shy of 12 years. I was separated in April 2007 with a diagnosis of Major Depression Severe Recurring and given a rating of 10% and severance. When I finally received my DD214 I filed my claim with the VA in July 2007 for the condition leading to my separation and the other conditions that were not reviewed during my PEB. I received a rating decision in April 2008 with a decision granting me 50% for my Major Depression and an additional 10% for a issue not reviewed by the PEB. The decision was received within 12 months of discharge. My rating continues with the VA for the two conditions following my review last year. An active duty friend informed me about a news story in late 2007/early 2008 about Lt. Col. Parkers efforts to shed light on the documented problems with ratings review. When I learned the form became available to submit my case for independent review I submitted in early 2010 and received notice that I had not completed something properly and needed to submit paperwork again. I received a letter in October 2010 that my package had been sent to the PDBR for review. Yesterday I received a letter from the Department of the Navy Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards. The letter included the record of proceedings from the PDBR, a letter from the President of the PDBR Retired AF Col. Michael F. LoGrande to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Manpower and Reserve Affairs and a letter from the Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards to me. The recommendation from the President of the PDBR to the Navy was to recharacterize my separation to reflect permanent disability retirement with a combined disability rating of 30% rather than 10%. The letter from the Navy to me said they were not going to accept the recommendation from the President of the PDBR.
I could not read the letters you posted. What was the Navy's rationale for the 10% rating being correct? You might have to go to federal court. You have up to six years from date of discharge to file. Hopefully Jason will comment on this option. The Navy has a established history of doing the least possible. See DES Outrage 15.
http://www.pebforum.com/content/des...deny-disability-benefits-wounded-warriors-65/
There are probably Navy documents relating to this decsion you did not receive. You need to contact the Navy Coucil of Review Boards (CORB) and get all internal documents relating to this decision.
Mike
Mike
http://www.pebforum.com/content/des...deny-disability-benefits-wounded-warriors-65/
There are probably Navy documents relating to this decsion you did not receive. You need to contact the Navy Coucil of Review Boards (CORB) and get all internal documents relating to this decision.
Mike
Mike
Mike,
The Navy's rationale was that one member of the board felt that my removal from the highly demanding navy nuclear power program as a submariner and placement as an office clerk while on limited duty showed that I was not meeting the standards for the 30% rating since my commander said I could perform office tasks well. The member also noted information that I know to be inaccurate regarding my condition during the VA evaluation stating that I was going to college and socializing with friends. I spent a year without a regular job near following my discharge finding jobs when I could and living off my severance and saving until I had no other options than to return to doing work similar to what I did in the Navy which did not help with my condition.
The Navy's rationale was that one member of the board felt that my removal from the highly demanding navy nuclear power program as a submariner and placement as an office clerk while on limited duty showed that I was not meeting the standards for the 30% rating since my commander said I could perform office tasks well. The member also noted information that I know to be inaccurate regarding my condition during the VA evaluation stating that I was going to college and socializing with friends. I spent a year without a regular job near following my discharge finding jobs when I could and living off my severance and saving until I had no other options than to return to doing work similar to what I did in the Navy which did not help with my condition.
Jason Perry
Founder and Leader
Site Founder
Staff Member
PEB Forum Veteran
Lifetime Supporter
Registered Member
Yes, this sounds like a good case to take to Court of Federal Claims. The important thing to keep in mind is that the six years to file there for your claim runs from date of discharge. So, you have some time, but not a lot. Essentially, you would be arguing that the decision to not accept the majority vote of the PDBR retiring you was arbitrary and capricious (though, you might need to argue alternative things, like the decision to rate you at less than 50%, given the VA's rating, was arbitrary and capricious and contrary to regulations).
Jason,
Thanks for the advise. I don't really have the resources to pursue a legal case against the Navy currently. I have considered forwarding my information to Senators and Congressmen as well as the Media to remind them these practices continue today. There have been a few articles and new information posted about the PDBR recently and I want to do anything I can to prevent those who have not yet submitted from getting the kind of results I just did.
Thanks for the advise. I don't really have the resources to pursue a legal case against the Navy currently. I have considered forwarding my information to Senators and Congressmen as well as the Media to remind them these practices continue today. There have been a few articles and new information posted about the PDBR recently and I want to do anything I can to prevent those who have not yet submitted from getting the kind of results I just did.
It has been a long few days since I received my letter from the Navy. I live in Hawaii and am represesented in the Senate by Senator Akaka the former Chairman of the committee on Veteran's Affairs and Senator Inouye the current Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations and the Chairman for the the Subcommittee on Defense. My wife who has done some much research is helping me to prepare information to forward to them. I don't know if it will help but I guess it's the next step in this. I have the feeling that just like they always have the DoD will be justified in what they did procedurally but not ethically. The dignity in all of this is gone and it is shameful.
I have attached the documents I received back from the PDBR. I'm trying to understand the rules of the game they are playing to call them out for not playing fair. The only thing that jumps out to me without looking into the medical stuff which is difficult to understand is the referenced DoDI 6040.44 Enclosure 3 Section 5.f. states "The PDBR shall establish a recommendation based on a simple majority of the board members." In the record of proceeding the board issued two recommendations which seems plainly wrong.
You need to request from the Navy Council of Review Boards all documents and emails relating to this decision. There is likely advisory opinions done by the CORB medical personnel on your case. You need to get your eyes on these documents.
Mike
Mike
Roger that. I will prepare a request and get it out today.
Thanks
Thanks
This might be a good fighting point for any people who have not had a review done yet...
In the Manual of the Medical Department (US Navy) Article 18-15 covering NMA states in section (3)
The NMA is to be completed by the servicemember's parent command, and to the maximum extent practicable be signed by the patient's CO.
it states in section (4) "SECNAVINST 1850.4 series mandates that "commanders will ensure that NMAs are submitted to the requesting facility within 15 calendar days from the date of receipt of such request." For patients having transferred PCS from the previous parent command or having been sent TEMDU from the previous parent command to an MTF for treatment, the MTF is still obligated to obtain the NMA from the previous parent command."
My NMA was not completed IAW this requirement. It was completed by the command I was TEMDU to. My wife found this while researching last night. She asked me a few questions and I had no idea this was required. I just assumed that they did their job properly.
In the Manual of the Medical Department (US Navy) Article 18-15 covering NMA states in section (3)
The NMA is to be completed by the servicemember's parent command, and to the maximum extent practicable be signed by the patient's CO.
it states in section (4) "SECNAVINST 1850.4 series mandates that "commanders will ensure that NMAs are submitted to the requesting facility within 15 calendar days from the date of receipt of such request." For patients having transferred PCS from the previous parent command or having been sent TEMDU from the previous parent command to an MTF for treatment, the MTF is still obligated to obtain the NMA from the previous parent command."
My NMA was not completed IAW this requirement. It was completed by the command I was TEMDU to. My wife found this while researching last night. She asked me a few questions and I had no idea this was required. I just assumed that they did their job properly.
Is a response to the council's letter requesting the records enough or does it need to be a FOIA listing specific types of records?
A friend put this together for me to request the records.
Here's a letter my wife wrote to our Senator.
Here is the letter requesting information the PDBR used in making it's determination and the statistical information for all cases in all branches including rejections by the Secretary of the respective branches.