The problem with the use of templates is that they are, over time and overusage, predictable; being predictable, they become ineffective. Now, from the perspective of the Office of Personnel Management, applying a template to a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS, whether predictable or not, is somewhat irrelevant, to the extent that a denial is still a denial, and an approval is simply an approval.
It is only if and when a case is appealed (after an initial denial and a denial at the Second Stage, at the Request for Reconsideration Stage) to the Merit Systems Protection Board, that the template has to be “defended” if the Administrative Judge asks for clarification of the issues by referring to the template-based denial. Moreover, what is predictable is the combination of medical condition/denial rationale. For instance: for Fibromyalgia: “The condition waxes and wanes”; for Major Depression: “Not enough time has been allowed for the efficacy of a medication regimen“; for anxiety & panic attacks: “There is insufficient objective medical evidence”; for Chronic pain: “Physical therapy has not been sufficiently given a chance to…” These are some examples of templates used by the Office of Personnel Management, each of which can easily be refutted in any particular case. The methodology of refutation, obviously, is where a federal disability attorney can be of greatest counsel and representation.
Sincerely, Robert R. McGill, Esquire
OPM Disability Retirement, Et Cetera… 