Robert R. McGill Administrative Law Blog on Lawyers.com

     In effective argumentation, persuasion, written memoranda, oral presentation, and the entire spectrum of attempting to convince the "other side" of the validity, force, appropriateness, and viability of any administrative or legal filing of any nature, it is often a useful tool to attempt to view an issue from that "other" perspective.  Remember that, in filing a Federal disability retirement application under FERS or CSRS, it is good to consider the fact that the OPM representative who will be reviewing your particular application, merely sees your application as one among hundreds of files assigned to him or her.  With that in mind, the essential question becomes:  How can my particular application, as one among many, be reviewed in such a way that it "stands apart" so that it will be quickly approved?  If you ask that question, or any variation of such a question, then you may be taking a wrong approach.  Remember that filing for disability retirement under FERS or CSRS is not like applying for a job; you are not filing a resume that needs to stand out; rather, it is often best if your particular application is nothing more than a "run of the mill" application -- with strong, unequivocal and irrefutable medical evidence, along with strong legal arguments to support your case.  Yes, of course your Applicant's Statement of Disability (SF 3112A) should explicitly describe the human condition of medical disablement; yes, the "nexus" between your medical condition and your job should be carefully constructed; but no, your application should not necessarily "stand out" as uniquely different -- for such an application will often be viewed as "suspicious" and "over-stated", and may well lead to not just a first viewing, but a re-viewing, and a possible denial

Sincerely, Robert R. McGill, Esquire