Airman

It's complex. My original claim ( I was granted s/c but rated 0%) is still pending on three separate counts ( prejudicial errors and misinterpretations of correspondence, statutes and regulations) as I see it. The informal claim for increase (3.157) was incendental and is also still pending. It, the evidence associated with it, and all subsequent claims are now part of my still pending original claim. The evidence/symptoms for the informal claim were textbook and are of record for 60% at the time. This all arises from a recent rating award for associated manifestations of my original s/c disability. I'm appealing for an earlier effective date (encompassed ) and higher rating (evidence they didn't consider) to the date of my initial claim to include a 60% rating for my still pending subsequent informal claim for increase. That's where my question about Francisco v. Brown comes in. I know that all sounds convoluted. I did say it was complex. Thank you for your response.

. . . when "an increase in the disability rating is at issue, the PRESENT level of disability is of primary concern." I read this holding by the court referenced continuously on claims for increased Initial ratings that I've researched. If by "present" they mean right now as of today, current - I know they are to consider the entire history of of an injury or disability, but how much does my present level of disability weigh and how does it relate to the overwhelming medical evidence and sympyomatolgy of a still pending claim of 35 years ago? That was then, this is now.

My appeal has been certified to the BVA. As a matter of clarification of benefit sought on appeal, I submitted a statement seeking entitlement to a specific ratiing (60 percent) rather than the standard "a rating greater than". Was that a mistake? If the BVA denies the 60% requested will they award a rating that I meet the critera for or will they just deny the 60% without any additional or supplemental award - because I specifically requested 60%?

Thanks for your responses. I have no associations with SSA other than I will be paying for Medicare part B in the very near future. I'm assuming it's just another VA error and it shouldn't have any bearing on my case. It'll be brought to light sooner or later. i'm confident in the factual evidence and especially the case law that support my claim. It just a matter of time.

I filed a NOD and a subsequent Form 9 on an SOC on an EED claim (classic "DeLisio") for which I just received a SSOC, I assume based on new or additional evidence (theirs) which reads in part " . . we have received a negative reply from SSA with report of no medical treatment records for you." That was part of theiir "Reasons and Bases" ffor continued denial. Of course SSA has no medical or any other records except for the payments I made to them in high school and the time I spent in the Air Force. All my employment since then has been federal govt. Here's my question. OF WHAT RELEVENCE IS THAT to my claim for an EED? Since I had filed a previous Form 9 their cover letter stated that I did not have to respond and they would forward my appeal to the BVA after 30 days and that if I didn't want to wait for the 30 days to expire, I should write and let them know. I did write and told them to not wait for the 30 days to expire and proceed with my claim to the BVA. The only new evidence was the No SSA records. Should I be cocerned? There is still time for another Form 9 or should I just let it go and wait for the BVA hearing?

I plan on refering to subject Letter in an upcoming appeal and wanted to make sure that this IVDS Training Letter (02-04, dated October 24, 2002) is still in use by the VA and hasn't been recinded.

Under 5003, note 1 reads . . "cannot be combined with ratings based on limitation of motion.". Can someone please explain exactly what that means? I'm currently rated at 20% for DDD based on limitation of motion. I also have x-ray evidence of facet joint osteoarthritis. A Joint is not a Disc and they are not the same. Am I entitled to another 10% for the minor joint x-ray evidence OR does the "cannot be combined with ratings (my DDD is under 5242) based on limitation of motion" - play into this somehow? Wouldn't they be separate ratings and not combined? Thanks for any and all responses.