Federal Employee Medical Retirement: The Importance of Logical Sequence

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is important to recognize the logical “sequencing” of the Standard government forms to be submitted.

While the SF 3107 series (including Schedules A, B & C) and SF 2801 series (for CSRS employees, and also including Schedules A, B & C) may generally request personal and professional information of a rather innocuous nature (of course, one may argue that no amount or substantive form of information provided to the Federal government should be considered as such, but that is another issue altogether), the Federal/Postal Standard Forms which both FERS and CSRS must complete — the SF 3112A, SF 3112B, SF 3112C, and SF 3112D (yes, I know, there is a SF 3112E, but that is merely a checklist for the Agency to fill out; although, on SF 3112E is the very justification that proves that SF 3112C is not a necessary form, but rather to be used as an intermediate vehicle in order to obtain the necessary medical documentation for a Federal Disability Retirement application) — should be done so in a proper, logical sequence.  

Obviously, if one is going to utilize the “Physician’s Statement” (SF 3112C) in order to have the doctor provide the justifying foundation for a Federal Disability Retirement application (which, incidentally, the undersigned attorney would advise against), then that should probably be the first and primary Standard government Form to begin with.  It will likely intimidate the treating doctor, and perhaps even confuse the issue; but from a logical standpoint, that would be the one to begin with.  But then, logic and sequence is not of paramount importance in the Federal government; just take a look at the fiscal mess we are in to understand such a sentiment.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

OPM Disability Retirement: Always Stick to the Basics

If one’s thoughts advance too far beyond the practical application of what one is engaged in, often the complexity initiated by the human mind will disproportionately put out of balance the reality of a requirement as opposed to the endless possibilities ventured by the human imagination.  

In preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application under either FERS or CSRS, it is often counterproductive to reflect too extensively upon the various standard forms which must be completed.

Yes, the forms are confusing, create unnecessary consternation, and need correlation and cooperative coordination between them in order to produce uniformity and consistency in a Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application.  

Yes, it is precisely the inconsistencies, the internal and external contradictions (whether apparent or real, substantive or peripheral) which the Office of Personnel Management focuses upon in justifying a denial of a Federal Disability Retirement application.  

Nevertheless, it is more often than not the undue focus upon the potential complexities of the standard forms, the rumination upon potential consequences not yet actualized, of questioning, well, what is it that this question is really asking for?  Do they want me to include X, as opposed to Y?  Will it hurt my case if I say B, instead of including C, D & E?  Am I required to include everything, or will it be counted against me if I leave it out?  

Such questions are a natural part of preparing and formulating a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS.  If such ruminations result in an inability to proceed and advance forward, it might be time to contact someone who specializes in preparing FERS & CSRS Federal Disability Retirement applications.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire