10 U.S.C. § 1222

Physical evaluation boards

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)Response to Applications and Appeals.—The Secretary of each military department shall ensure, in the case of any member of the armed forces appearing before a physical evaluation board under that Secretary’s supervision, that documents announcing a decision of the board in the case convey the findings and conclusions of the board in an orderly and itemized fashion with specific attention to each issue presented by the member in regard to that member’s case. The requirement under the preceding sentence applies to a case both during initial consideration and upon subsequent consideration due to appeal by the member or other circumstance.(b)Liaison Officer (PEBLO) Requirements and Training.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations establishing—(A) a requirement for the Secretary of each military department to make available to members of the armed forces appearing before physical evaluation boards operated by that Secretary employees, designated as physical evaluation board liaison officers, to provide advice, counsel, and general information to such members on the operation of physical evaluation boards operated by that Secretary; and(B) standards and guidelines concerning the training of such physical evaluation board liaison officers.(2) The Secretary shall ensure compliance by the Secretary of each military department with physical evaluation board liaison officer requirements and training standards and guidelines at least once every three years.(c)Standardized Staff Training and Operations.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations on standards and guidelines concerning the physical evaluation board operated by each of the Secretaries of the military departments with regard to—(A) assignment and training of staff;(B) operating procedures; and(C) timeliness of board decisions.(2) The Secretary shall ensure compliance with standards and guidelines prescribed under paragraph (1) by each physical evaluation board at least once every three years.(Added Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title V, § 597(a)(1), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2236.)Editorial NotesEffective Date

Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title V, § 597(b), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2237, provided that: “Section 1222 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to decisions rendered on cases commenced more than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 17, 2006].”

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesQuality Review of Medical Evaluation Boards, Physical Evaluation Boards, and Physical Evaluation Board Liaison Officers

Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title V, § 524, Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1723, as amended by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, § 813(f), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1851, provided that:“(a)In General.—The Secretary of Defense shall standardize, assess, and monitor the quality assurance programs of the military departments to evaluate the following in the performance of their duties (including duties under chapter 61 of title 10, United States Code):“(1) Medical Evaluation Boards.“(2) Physical Evaluation Boards.“(3) Physical Evaluation Board Liaison Officers.“(b)Objectives.—The objectives of the quality assurance program shall be as follows:“(1) To ensure accuracy and consistency in the determinations and decisions of Medical Evaluation Boards and Physical Evaluation Boards.“(2) To otherwise monitor and sustain proper performance of the duties of Medical Evaluation Boards and Physical Evaluation Boards, and of Physical Evaluation Board Liaison Officers.“(3) Such other objectives as the Secretary shall specify for purposes of the quality assurance program.”

[(c) Repealed. Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, § 813(f), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1851.]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2009–2022 · leading case: Peterson v. United States, 104 Fed. Cl. 196 (Fed. Cl. 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Peterson v. United States, 104 Fed. Cl. 196 (Fed. Cl. 2012). · cites it 9× “Citing 10 U.S.C. § 1222 , plaintiff requested detailed findings and presented six questions to which he sought answers.”

Wollman v. Geren, 603 F. Supp. 2d 879 (E.D. Va. 2009). · cites it 3× “Plaintiff suggests that an “actual controversy” exists as to whether the requirements of 10 U.S.C. § 1222 (a), which requires military review boards dealing with certain physical disability cases to convey their findings, conclusions, and reasoning, would apply to an appeal…”

Chatman v. United States Dep't of Def., 270 F. Supp. 3d 184 (D.D.C. 2017). “’s App at A29; see 10 U.S.C. § 1222 . A PEB is a fact-finding board responsible for evaluating the nature, cause, degree of severity, and likely permanency of a soldier’s disability.”

Torres v. Harker (D.D.C. 2022). · cites it 6× “10 U.S.C. § 1222 (a) (emphases added). B.”

Casiano v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2019). · cites it 3× “Thus, Plaintiffs claim that the system that the HHS Secretary has established does not comply with the requirement in 10 U.S.C. § 1222 that “documents announcing a decision of the board .”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.