- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 230
Alright So heres the story,
In 2016, I was provided with CIA due to one condition, meeting the Severe and Permanent Category.
I was granted Grade 3, Due to Time in, etc.
Fast forward to 2017/2018, I have another condition, that existed at the same time, however, trying to get into the specialist to properly diagnose took much longer, as it was not deemed life threatening/medical emergency. (hearing, Tinnitus, I have close to 400 DSHL across four frequencies, )
This was listed on the CIA Reassessment, as a second condition, with the Audiogram attached, showing that the DSHL Exceeds the 300 threshold for considering it Severe and Permanent, (FYI- It is degrading yearly, in late 2016 my DSHL total was near 320/340)
I hunt, but wear ear pro- and have missed both seasons for Deer since, and had one turkey outing where we used bow, so there is no excuse for the decline of hearing from my personal life.
On the Reassessment and Departmental review request, I had stated please see the Audiogram as it shows Hearing loss in Excess of 300 DSHL to be considered for Severe and Permanent.
Having two Severe and Permanent disabilities, Qualifies me for Grade 2, I tried to find it on the page, however the PFL propaganda has flooded in and I cant find the proper wording that they had used.
Please keep in mind, I currently am employed, where hearing is the utmost importance, as I deal with customers on the phone, and must be able to hear audio messages, prompts etc. So a continued hearing loss, will result in longer being employable in my current field.
Needless to say, the reassessment from the departmental review was rejected on the grounds that no new medical evidence had been provided (false), as well as not having in excess of 300 DSHL. Again False, Audiogram proof(these were the only two reasons)
This was a departmental review, for a rejected Reassessment with the same criteria, This is a simple question of someone not reading or understanding the request, Has anyone encountered this, I have already waited since January, on Both the Reassess and now the review.
So Seeing that the member that reviewed is outright wrong, with their reasons for rejecting it, how do I go about fighting it? is there a way around going through BPA with it, so not having to wait in excess of another 6 months plus.
In 2016, I was provided with CIA due to one condition, meeting the Severe and Permanent Category.
I was granted Grade 3, Due to Time in, etc.
Fast forward to 2017/2018, I have another condition, that existed at the same time, however, trying to get into the specialist to properly diagnose took much longer, as it was not deemed life threatening/medical emergency. (hearing, Tinnitus, I have close to 400 DSHL across four frequencies, )
This was listed on the CIA Reassessment, as a second condition, with the Audiogram attached, showing that the DSHL Exceeds the 300 threshold for considering it Severe and Permanent, (FYI- It is degrading yearly, in late 2016 my DSHL total was near 320/340)
I hunt, but wear ear pro- and have missed both seasons for Deer since, and had one turkey outing where we used bow, so there is no excuse for the decline of hearing from my personal life.
On the Reassessment and Departmental review request, I had stated please see the Audiogram as it shows Hearing loss in Excess of 300 DSHL to be considered for Severe and Permanent.
Having two Severe and Permanent disabilities, Qualifies me for Grade 2, I tried to find it on the page, however the PFL propaganda has flooded in and I cant find the proper wording that they had used.
Please keep in mind, I currently am employed, where hearing is the utmost importance, as I deal with customers on the phone, and must be able to hear audio messages, prompts etc. So a continued hearing loss, will result in longer being employable in my current field.
Needless to say, the reassessment from the departmental review was rejected on the grounds that no new medical evidence had been provided (false), as well as not having in excess of 300 DSHL. Again False, Audiogram proof(these were the only two reasons)
This was a departmental review, for a rejected Reassessment with the same criteria, This is a simple question of someone not reading or understanding the request, Has anyone encountered this, I have already waited since January, on Both the Reassess and now the review.
So Seeing that the member that reviewed is outright wrong, with their reasons for rejecting it, how do I go about fighting it? is there a way around going through BPA with it, so not having to wait in excess of another 6 months plus.