Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules
jamescripps2
-
Posts
518 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
23
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
VA Disability, benefits, news and more.
VA Benefits News
Store
Posts posted by jamescripps2
-
-
There has been many questions addressing children of Vietnam Veterans. Very little information is out there. To raise awareness and trying to get answers there will be a broadcast relating to my daughter's medical conditions. The broadcast will air from WTVF Chanel 5 News Investigates, Nashville Tennessee on Feb. 3rd 2020 at 5:00 PM, 6:00 PM and 10:00 PM Central time. It will feature Me, and my daughter. It could be the next big thing.
If you are not within the viewing area you can watch via internet.
https://www.tvopedia.com/channel/WTVF_-_News_Channel_5
You can watch a prior broadcast on the same subject here https://www.wrdw.com/content/news/I-TEAM-Could-the-children-of-those-e
-
Berta, I came to this site this evening to post the new information, but you beat me to it. Notice, in the new report, The DOD conceded a second spraying at Fort Gordon in 1968, sometime before July. This is new information.
Also note on page 6&7 that in a 600 lb drum of AO, the toxin 2,3,7,8, TCDD weighs less than a paperclip. Notwithstanding, it is still the most toxic substance known to man.
-
Wow, thanks. That is the case that i was looking for.
-
First off I am R-1 to include the SMC "O". One "L" for the loss of use of two extremities and the other "L" for A&A. I read a lot of prior BVA decisions. I remember one case where the board awarded A&A, SMC "L". Furthermore, the board said that it refused to award a second SMC "L" for A&A for another separate and distinct condition which would entitle the appellant to SMC "O". Did I dream this up, or can an appellant actually receive two SMC "L" awards by showing two separate and distinct needs for A&A, thereby advancing to SMC "O"?
I wish that I had bookmarked the case but it didn't interest me at the time, although it bugs me now! My brain does seem to burn out and short circuit on these old hard questions.
-
At this time there are demands to do more research to expand the list of diseases, conditions and birth defects known to have been associated with offspring children and grandchildren of agent orange exposed veterans.
The push, spearheaded by the Vietnam Veterans Of America and other veterans organizations, is now in the spotlight. At this time the VA only recognizes spina bifita in the children of a male AO exposed veterans. That is ridiculous! Vietnamese children born with birth defects have been spotlighted for many years. The question is, are our children and offsprings immune?
The list for children of female exposed veterans is more expansive. Congress needs a reason to take a look at this issue and I intend to do my part in giving lawmakers that reason. That issue is my next crusade! The more cases of birth defects in children of exposed veterans that we can bring to light , the better the chances of getting the attention of Congress in order to expand the list and obtain help for our affected offsprings.
-
What we need to concentrate on is how many offspring children of agent orange veterans have been born with birth defects. Research has shown, and it is well known that the effects of agent orange can cause a three generation birth defect residual in the children and the grandchildren of those, both male and female, who were exposed to agent orange in military service .
-
Berta, I said start a new forum when I should have said start a new topic. Many children of agent orange exposed veterans are born with birth defects. I personally know of many, including my own daughter.
-
OK, the link failed to connect, so, lets do this the hard way. Hopefully an admin can allow the link and fix or re do it.
Type into a google search, or copy and paste the below words into a google search.
agent orange fort gordon wrdw news james cripps
then scroll down 5 articles to I TEAM INVESTIGATES OFF SPRINGS
when it comes up you can click on the video and/or read the text article.
I do it all for you and I hope that I am not violating any of hadit's rules by posting this important information.
This is the first broadcast of a series. I will post as they become available.
-
This WRDW News Investigates broadcast was aired on the 6:00 & 10:00 news in Augusta Ga. on 9/25/2019. This is the first of a series, more will follow.
This link will work, click on the link, when page not found comes up, look five stories down on the right side of the screen and click on
I TEAM INVESTIGATES OFF SPRINGS. If you have trouble, see my next post in this thread.
-
I have used the hotline several times. It is not for whiners, but if you have a legitimate complaint and can explain your issue in a way that supports the fact that the VA might have not followed the rules and statutes, then yes it will do you some good.
-
R-1 is about as drastic as I am hoping that I ever will need. Should I ever need R-2 there is no doubt that we will go with the CNA certification route, so long as my wife has good enough health.
I do expect that the post 911 caregiver act will be expanded to include pre 911 vets before too long. I just don't know how that might be implemented as to coexist with A&A. There could be an offset of some degree, just my thoughts on the matter, we will see.
-
Please note that I did not say that my scenario would be the only way that the wife could fill the role of caregiver, It was offered as just one option.
My wife, in my own case might consider becoming a CNA by completing a short course. On the other hand she would not at all interested in becoming a RN or obtaining a four year bachelors degree. If she managed to get the CNA certification she would no longer be required to communicate monthly with health care professionals to fulfill the requirements to become my caretaker because she would be the licensed professional with her own credentials. I doubt that her qualifications as a CNA or LPN would be questioned by the VBA in determining whether or not she could act as the professional caregiver on the required daily basis as required at 38 CFR 3.352. I am not at the point of needing R-2 at this time and hope that I never will be. Just considering options.
(4) A person performing personal health-care services who is a relative or other member of the veteran's household is not exempted from the requirement that he or she be a licensed health-care professional or be providing such care under the regular supervision of a licensed health-care professional.
-
Your wife has chapter 35 benefits. If she uses the educational benefit to go and take a course to become a licensed Certified Nursing Assistant, (CNA) or a licensed LPN, paid for by the chapter 35 benefit she could then become your licensed health care professional. You could then qualify for the R-2 @ about a thousand more bucks per month. This would for sure work for a pre 911 vet already drawing at the R-1 rate. If you are post 911, I don't know if there might be a glitch or offset if she is already getting paid to be your caregiver.
-
Thanks for the response asknod. I have a great respect for your knowledge. My claim will be certified to the BVA for the EED issue. The VBA did award the SMC "O" and the R-1 along with eight months retro in a partial grant that was generated as a result of my calling the Veterans Whitehouse Hotline. If I am successful with the EED appeal at the BVA they will owe me sixty more months of retro.
The issue to be decided at the BVA is whether or not A&A should have been inferred in the original RO decision and if so, did the medical evidence of record at that time indicate possible entitlement a grant of A&A at the rate of SMC"L"? My contention is that the medical evidence in the hands of the RVSR at the time of the original decision indicated entitlement due to the profound nature of my 100% service connected heart disease. The RVSR had good cause to invite and execute the development of A&A at SMC "L".
This, as in all claims, could be argued and adjudicated either way, but I am confident. I am hopeful that the Appeals Modernization Act OF 2017, that was just signed by President Trump, will speed up the appeals process.
-
The SSOC says that I can submit more information rebutting the partial grant decision. That is optional because if I do not respond the claim will be certified to the board for the EED issue.
The RO says that they were not required to consider or infer the A&A on the earlier decision because I did not claim A&A. My position and contention is that the RO was mandated by M21-1MR to consider A&A because the medical evidence at the time of the original decision supported the need of A&A. In light of the medical evidence of record at that time the rater should have invited a claim for A&A and developed it.
Yes Berta, I think that it was a CUE and I will ask the bVA to call it that in my rebuttal to the SSOC before it is certified to the board.
And yes, on the SSOC I have been also given the option of just dropping the issue of an Earlier Effective Date and settling for the eight months retro instead of the sixty eight months retro.
In my opinion, if I cave in and settle for the eight months retro instead of letting the BVA adjudicate the issue, they should then infer SMC for brain dead!
I expect Alex will chime in on this one with his take on it sooner or later.
-
I understand what you are saying Buck. The only issue up for for decision at the BVA is the EED, so I figure that there is no reason to not let it play out. There is everything to gain and nothing to loose.
Unless I have failed to fully understand the Mandate requiring the VBA inferred claims upon any new 100% grant at M1-21 I have a chance at recovering the retro.
-
My August 2017 grant was for SMC "O" and A&A at R-1. It was a partial RO grant on my appeal. In the appeal I asked for the "O" and R-1 with a effective date of Jan 1, 2012, that being the date of the claim.
I did not claim A&A when I filed the 2012 claim. My contention is that the VA is mandated to consider and infer A&A upon any new 100% grant. If A&A needs to be developed based upon the evidence then the rater should invite the evidence to support the claim as it is the duty of the rater to maximize benefits. In the decision of December 2012, I was granted loss of use of a hand and a foot at SMC "M". I was granted the automobile grant with adaptive equipment and the SAH grant. A&A was not invited, considered or inferred by the rater upon that decision.
My contention is that A&A should have been considered, invited and inferred based upon my profound heart disabilities at the time of the earlier decision. Lately, August 2017, I was awarded the "O" and A&A at R-1 based solely upon heart disease. My heart disease that the A&A grant was based upon in the 2017 grant is exactly as it was in 2012 when the claim was filed, nothing has changed. My cardiologist states that there is no significant change between nuke stress test of 2012 and 2017.
I was paid retro for eight months instead of the sixty eight months that would have been due if the mandated A&A had been inferred in the earlier decision as I contend that it should have.
I have been given the option of withdrawing the request for the earlier effective date or doing nothing thereby letting the claim be certified to the Board and the EED date be adjudicated by the BVA.
Heart problems alone, in evidence of my C file and as noted in my VAMC records at the date of both the earlier decision of 2012 and latter decision of 2017 are as follows.
Chronic Systolic Heart Failure, Hyperlipidemia, Warfarin indicated, Biventricular automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator, Chronic atrial fibrillation, ischemic congestive cardiomyopathy, Ventricular Tachycardia, Post CAGB 1997 and implanted stents.
I think that I need to let it ride and take my chances of an EED at the BVA. It may not take too long with the President having signed the Appeals Modernization legislation today.
Any ideas or opinions on my chances of winning the issues of A&A as an inferred issue and the EED as a result would be welcome. Retro, if I win would be paid for 68 months vs 8 months as it now stands.
-
8 hours ago, mbl22885 said:
You're wrong.
I can agree with what you posted here. Your award was for A&A. A&A is indeed a SMC "L" award.
-
The requirements to be eligible for for SMC "L" according to USC 1114(L).
If the veteran, as the result of service-connected disability, has suffered the anatomical loss or loss of use of both feet, or of one hand and one foot, or is blind in both eyes, with 5/200 visual acuity or less, or is permanently bedridden or with such significant disabilities as to be in need of regular aid and attendance, the monthly compensation shall be $3,327
The USC was written by congress and it would take an act of congress to change it or to modify it. If you was awarded an "L" rating for anything else you should keep it to yourself because it is a CUE on the part of the rater and will be severed if discovered. VBA decisions depend on supporting evidence, the laws governing the issues and precedents, no matter how hard you may have fought or will ever fight.
You need to ask your VSO for a copy of your code sheet and see what exactly the "L" was awarded for. Please let us know!
Not trying to discourage you here but you need to be realistic in your expectation. If you don't qualify for the SAH grant under the law enacted by congress governing the grant, it would be an illegal act for the VBA to award it to you. The law, (USC) as congress wrote it is not optional nor is it discretionary for the VA to follow or not.
Not trying to bust your bubble here but you asked a question, like it or not, this is the answer to that question. Do some unbiased research while you wait on the decision. If you come up with legislation that supports the fact that the VBA can award the SAH grant outside what was mandated by congress in USC 1114 please point it out.
Nobody ever fought the VA harder than I did but I wised up and used the USC, CFR, and M21 as they were written to substantiate my claims.
-
SMC L is not awarded for PTSD. An "L" award is Special Monthly Compensation given only for A&A or for loss of use of two extremities. However, It is mandated that the VA consider A&A when any new 100% award is granted. I can understand that PTSD awarded at the 100% rate might also have inferred A&A, which would account for your L rating.
-
I will restate what Berta has said many times, "All things are possible".
38 CFR 3.350 does clearly defines loss of use of a hand or foot.
Loss of use of a hand or a foot will be held to exist when no effective function remains other than that which would be equally well served by an amputation stump at the site of election below elbow or knee with use of a suitable prosthetic appliance. The determination will be made on the basis of the actual remaining function, whether the acts of grasping, manipulation, etc., in the case of the hand, or of balance, propulsion, etc., in the case of the foot, could be accomplished equally well by an amputation stump with prosthesis
2101(a) Grant Fact Sheet VA Pamphlet 26-69-1: Questions on Specially Adapted Housing and Special Housing Adaptations (Online Version) Part 1 - Specially Adapted Housing Eligibility & Statutory Requirements 1. What is the governing law relating to specially adapted housing for disabled veterans or servicemembers? Title 38, United States Code, chapter 21. The original statute was Public Law 702, 80th Congress, dated June 19, 1948. Public Law 109-233, The Veterans Housing Opportunity and Benefits Act of 2006, dated June 15, 2006, and Public Law 110- 289, Economic and Housing Recovery Act of 2008, dated July 30, 2008, amended Public Law 702 and expanded benefit eligibility. 2. Which veterans or servicemembers are basically eligible for the grant? The Specially Adapted Housing Grant is available to veterans or servicemembers who are entitled to compensation for permanent and total service-connected disability due to: a. The loss, or loss of use, of both lower extremities such as to preclude locomotion without the aid of braces, crutches, canes, or a wheelchair. b. Blindness in both eyes having only light perception, plus loss or loss of use of one lower extremity. c. The loss, or loss of use, of one lower extremity together with (1) residuals of organic disease or injury, or (2) the loss or loss of use of one upper extremity. Item (1) and Item (2) above must so affect the functions of balance or propulsion as to preclude locomotion without the aid of braces, crutches, canes, or a wheelchair. d. The loss, or loss of use, of both upper extremities, so as to preclude use of the arms at or above the elbows. e. The permanent and total disability is due to a severe burn injury (as so determined).
-
AICD under 7011 is an automatic 100% P&T award if your AO exposure is conceded by VBA.
-
I have used the White House Hotline twice. Both times was in July.
I visited the RO in Nashville TN. to check on an appeal and was told that my file was not going to be reviewed for somewhere between 24 to 48 months. I called the hotline and explained my dissatisfaction with the timeline and brought their attention to a particular injustice in the previous DRO De Novo decision. The person on the line looked up my claim and agreed that there was indeed an injustice. I was told that my claim would be expedited. The next day I got a call from the RO responding to my hotline call. Two weeks later I was awarded SMC "O" and A&A at the rate of R-1.
My second call to the hotline was to complain about prosthetics and the SAH process. Both were addressed and remedied in short order. The Hotline is the first avenue of recourse that the veteran has ever had to rebut the VA. It is not for whiners and is not meant to speed up the claims process, but it will help in the case of a clear injustice committed against a veteran.
Thank you Mr. Trump!
-
You are required to have loss of, or loss of use of at least one limb to get a SAH grant if you are a post 911 vet. You need loss of, or loss of use of at least two limbs to get a SAH grant if you are a pre 911 vet. In certain cases total blindness in combination with total loss of hearing will suffice. Absent service connected loss of a limb or loss of use of a limb, no amount of percentage is going to qualify you for the SAH grant.
Working Toward R-1
in R. 1 and R. 2
Posted
I am rated 100% for chronic stage 3 kidney disease, I am not and never have been on dialysis,
I am rated 100% for ischemic heart disease to include implanted AICD.
I am also rated 100% for LOU of one hand and one foot. I also have several other lesser % ratings.
I was also granted "O" for the two "L" awards (LOU of 2 extremities and A&A} No condition being considered twice.
Final rating is the maximum award of "0" and R-1.