Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

VA Disability Claims Articles

Ask Your VA Claims Question | Current Forum Posts Search | Rules | View All Forums
VA Disability Articles | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users

aboogger

Seaman
  • Posts

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About aboogger

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://r-jwatsonfamily.com
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Southwest Missouri
  • Interests
    Building websites and working on computers.<br /><br />Here's just a few of the websites I've designed and or help maintain.<br /><br />www.planetibsen.com <br />http://planetibsen.blogspot.com<br />www.pjranch.com<br />http://topesolaja.tripod.com<br />www.3clovelandscaping.com<br />davidwilliamsmusic.com<br /><br />Just copy and paste the links

Previous Fields

  • Service Connected Disability
    none
  • Branch of Service
    Army
  • Hobby
    webmaster

aboogger's Achievements

  1. Berta.... As to NVLSP, I first contacted them way back last year. I have had numerous emails to and from them on this matter and I have all the emails saved. As to my claim, I virtually did everything myself as far as writting all my NOD's and Appeals to include different 21-4138's ....and made sure I submitted ALL my private medical records to include a NEXUS from my Private Cardiologist back in 2008 whereas he stated my Early Onset of IHD was a direct cause from being exposed to AO. I have a VSO but he would NEVER assist me on anything except to transmit what I submitted so there as a paper trail....He is not a good VSO but I did not let that discourage me so I made sure I researched EVERYTHING and worded everything to my advantage. I even researched BVA cases and submitted two different case laws where two different Veterans were awarded TDIU for IHD with LESS severity than what my IHD is and has been for years. It took the idea of NEVER GIVE UP. In one of my 4138's I reminded the VA of my first claim back in 1995 and ask that they AMEND my earlier effective date back to then instead of 2001....So we'll see if they took heed to that...LOL
  2. After 9 1/2 years I finally WON....I was granted an increase to 60 percent for IHD and also awarded TDIU P & T with an effective date back to 2-2008. I was first denied in 2002 after filing in 2001 for IHD due to AO but IHD back then was not a presumptive. MY IHD is secondary to SC Hypertension. In my award letter yesterday it so stated that I will come under Nehmer Review once the New Rule for IHD is final. OK..Here's my question: Now that I'm rated at 60 percent but also awarded TDIU / P and T and with NO FUTURE EXAMS, how will I be rated under Nehmer??..My backpay on this TDIU award will go back to 2-2008...so when I'm approved for Nehmer, I know my effective date should go back to 7-2001 and up to 1-2008, but under what Percentage will the Retro be paid.???....Or will they (VA) rate me separate for the Nehmer Rule and pay back pay under that rating.... Questions I can not find or get answers.... According to NVLSP, the VA should retro me back to November 1995 as when I filed for SSDI back then I also filed for C and P with the VA...Got denied Compensation SC for IHD but in Jan1996 I was awarded a Non-Service Connection PENSION for IHD...btw...I also was awarded SSDI for Chronic Ischemic Heart Disease in 1996 as well... During my appeal for IU my SSDI was considered in my TDIU award...and it so states in my SSDI award that I had CHRONIC ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE back then...even before I knew anything about Agent Orange...
  3. So much for rushing around getting this on the Federal Register and shorting the comments period to 30 days instead of 60 or 90......Just as ALWAYS.....the Vietnam Vets are left sucking the hind tit....What happened to putting this on TOP PRIORITY.....Yep, just hope I'm still around but that could be doubtful with my MAJOR "ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE" and also the possibility of having Multiple Myeloma as well...Presently being tested for it NOW by the VA......BUT rest assured my WIFE knows all there is to know on DIC....I have made sure that....So MR. VA, you might screw me but you WILL NOT screw my wife....
  4. This is a response to an email that was sent to Gen. Shineski about the New Rule On behalf of Secretary Shinseki, thank you for your note. We appreciate your concern. There has been a great deal of confusion in the public concerning the Secretary’s announcement that he intended to create presumptive service connections for three diseases linked to Agent Orange. It’s unfortunate that the media coverage did not include an explanation that the law requires VA to publish both a proposed rule and a final rule in the Federal Register before the Secretary’s decision can be implemented. Under the laws and executive orders governing the Federal rulemaking process, it normally takes agencies about two years to publish final regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations, although the Agent Orange statute in this case prescribes a much shorter timeframe. We are attempting to reconcile those laws so that veterans will not be adversely affected by delays in the Federal rulemaking process. This regulation is one of our highest priorities and we hope to complete it in less than half the time normally required, by expediting its processing within VA and by asking the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to shorten their required review period. We published the proposed rule, 2900-AN54, Diseases Associated With Exposure to Certain Herbicide Agents (Hairy Cell Leukemia and other Chronic B Cell Leukemias, Parkinson’s Disease and Ischemic Heart Disease), in the Federal Register on March 25, 2010. We felt that we had good cause to shorten the public comment period from 60 days to 30 days in order to help make this process go a little faster. When the public comment period closed on April 26, 2010, VA had received 669 public comments on the proposed rule. Since that time, regulatory staff at the Compensation and Pension Service have been working very hard reviewing, categorizing, and responding to these comments in a final rule. We are hopeful that they can complete the drafting stage this month so that the document can be submitted for legal review and coordination within VA. Once that is completed and the Secretary approves the final rule, we must deliver the document to OMB for review. OMB is authorized by executive order to take up to 90 days to complete their review, but we will be asking them to do their best to expedite their clearance. Once the final rule clears OMB, VA will publish it in the Federal Register, usually 3 to 4 days later, and the regulation would become effective on that date of publication. Because of the enormous cost of this rule, however, AN54 is subject to another Federal law. It is considered an economically significant “major rule” under the Congressional Review Act, which requires agencies to wait 60 days after publication in the Federal Register for Congress to review final rules before they are implemented. However, that law should not interfere with VA’s processing of claims, and I understand that veterans are being encouraged to submit their claims as soon as possible, even though the regulation is not yet in effect. I have provided this lengthy and technical explanation so that you can see why it’s difficult to predict just how soon this regulation can be published. As the Secretary’s delegate for monitoring VA’s progress in publishing important regulations, my best guess is that if all goes well with the final drafting and during the legal review, we might be able to submit the final rule to OMB for review by the end of June. If OMB needs the full 90 days to complete their review, we would expect to publish this regulation by October, 2010. I hope this candid explanation is helpful, even though it’s not what you were hoping to hear. At least you can inform your husband and our fellow veterans that despite any other information they may have heard from other sources, you got your information “straight from the horse’s mouth.” And this regulation is moving about as quickly as it can, given all the legal requirements of the Federal rulemaking process. If you need further information, please don’t hesitate to ask. Sincerely, Bob Robert C. McFetridge Director, Regulation Policy and Management (02REG) Office of the General Counsel U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 810 Vermont Ave, N.W., Room 1064 Washington, D.C. 20420 202-461-4932 This response could have been exaggerated somewhat on the time line. At least that's my opinion But who really knows for sure. At least there's a name, phone number, address and email addy if anyone else wants to send an email to inquiry....
  5. Let’s see if I can outline all this the right way: Here’s a scenario: Veteran files claim say in 2005, claim denied, Veteran files appeal. 2008 Veteran awarded SC of say 20 percent for a presumptive disease and receives back pay to 2005. Now Veteran appeals for higher rating. Lets’ say in 2010 he wins his appeal for a higher rating up to say 70 percent. Now that he’s 50 percent more on his rating, Does this veteran get retro back pay of the 50 percent back to his original claim date of 2008? Or does he just start getting a higher monthly disability? Now lets’ go a little more. Veteran appeals for IU in 2010 and later in the year the Veteran is awarded IU. Now the question again, does this veteran get retro back to 2005 for the difference between the 70 percent and the IU rating.?? I have never seen anything on this particular question before on any other forums. Again this is just a hypothetical question.
  6. Berta, thank you for the response, As to the IU form YES I submitted it within a couple of days of receiving it from the VARO via my VSO and I had also FAXED it to the Appeals Team. Yes I was denied for IHD/CAD when I first filed my claim for CAD due to AO back in 2001. I got denied in 2002 because CAD was not a presumptive disease at that time. When I reopened my claim in 2008 I had submitted New and Material Evidence of which the Nexus was enclosed at that time along with numerous medical records from 2006 up to 2008 and since getting awarded SC for IHD/HHD secondary to SC hypertension I have submitted additional NEW and Material Evidence. I have had numerous heart caths over the years and more recently since 2006 up to April 5, 2010 of which all of those records have been submitted as evidence. As I have stated before I first filed for VA Pension in 1995 for CAD when I also filed for SSDI due to CAD and was awarded Non Service Connected Disability Pension in 1995 and then 7 months later I was awarded SSDI for CAD and have been on SSDI since then. When I was awarded SSDI I lost my VA Disability Pension due to the income I was receiving from SSDI but MY wife and two daughters continued getting VA Pension payments until my daughters were no longer eligible but my wife continued until I was awarded SC for Hypertension then the Pension converted to SC Compensation in 2009 with an effective date back to 2008 when I reopened my claim for CAD due to AO. I have ALWAYS noted in my claims documentation that my CAD was due to AO, except back in 1995 when I applied for the VA Pension, as I did not know about AO issues back then. I have been told that my effective date "could" go back to 1995 but not sure how accurate that information really is, but for now I'm trying to get my effective date back to 2001. I have been in touch with the NVLSP via emails and they have all my claim information and have advised me to notify them once I'm awarded under the New Rule for CAD and AO or when the New Rule is official. I will also contact the NVLSP in ref: to the 1995 claim for NSC Disability for CAD to see if they can advise to whether that would be worth filing an appeal on for an effective date under the Nehmer Rule.
  7. Presently I'm rated at 10 percent for CAD/HHD and 10 percent SC for hypertension. However, the va sent me a notice a few weeks ago that they had opened a New Claim for IU and sent me an IU form to fill out and send back. I did NOT request the IU. I have been appealing for a higher rating and earlier effective date. But I have been on SSDI since 1996 due to CAD and have not worked since then and the VA has my SSDI Payment records. So that makes me believe they know I'm unemployable due to CAD and there's enough evidence in my claim file that shows I do have severe CAD and low ejection fractions, from 10 percent to 35 percent.
  8. Iwasn't diagnosed with congestive heart failure until 2008. I had already been diagnosed with IHD/CAD ini 1991 and have been since. CHF is a secondary condition to my CAD. Besides I've already been award SC for CAD secondary to SC hypertension. My private cardiologist has wrote his medical opinion in a Nexus that my early onset of IHD/CAD was caused by AO exposure.
  9. <h6 class="uiStreamMessage"> My private cardiologist has documented that I also suffer from occasional congestive heart failure. How would this diagnoses compare to the guidelines of "Chronic Congestive Heart Failure" per VA Guidelines?...This is additional to my severe Coronary Artery Disease. I also have severe small vessel disease as well. These particular medical reports have been submitted as new and material evidence on my appeal for an increase rating along with having additional stents a month ago, there's also documentation of "Patient has history of prior ejection fractions as low as 10 percent but it has recovered to 35 percent"... But my main question pertains to the congestive heart failure issue of being occasional. </h6>
  10. May I add that I am presently undergoing testing by the VAMC in our area for Multiple Myeloma.
  11. Berta, Thank you so much for your reply. I have not been employed since November of 1995 when my private primary care doctor and cardiologist both advised me and documented it in my records that I needed to apply for SSD because of my heart disease. The Depression came when I had to stop working and did not have any income coming in because of not being able to work. When I filed for SSD in Nov 95 it was for IHD/CAD then in April 1996 while my case was in appeals, I became severely depressed and ended up in the hospital for depression and thoughts of suicide, it was then my attorney for my SSD case contacted a adjudication officer with the SSA and had a phone conference with her and at that point she awarded me SSD for IHD and Depression. I have not been treated for depression in several years but still have bouts of depression but not to the point where I need medication or have been treated for it since back in 1996. Several years ago SSA sent me a form as to whether I was still unable to seek employment and I filed the form stating that my doctors stated that I was not able to return to the work force and since then, I have not had anymore forms sent to me from the SSA in that regard. This Monday I have to have another chemical induced stress test which will be performed by my private cardiologist because I'm still having unstable angina along with numerous bouts of almost passing out ( light headedness) even just after having the 5 more stents inserted in the Left Anterior Descending Artery three weeks ago. As I stated I had 5 bypasses in 1991 and since then I've lost three of those grafts which one of them was the Right Coronary Artery. Everytime my cardiologist performs a heart cath he confers with my heart surgeon as to whether I should have bypass again and the heart surgeon opts for the stenting because bypass surgery would be very difficult for me and very risky and this is documented in my medical records of which the VARO has in my C file. I didn't know what to do because the VARO did send me the IU form to fill out and submit along a VCAA of which I will file as "No New Evidence at this time and for the VA to proceed" and as for the Stress test results this Monday I'll have that report later to file if need be. Again, Thank you very much.
  12. Berta, Did not know where else to post this: Here's a quick overview of what I'm inquiring. Jan 2010 I was awarded SC for hypertensive heart disease and coronary artery disease secondary to SC hypertension, even though I had submitted my claim for IHD/CAD due to AO exposure while in VN back in 2001 but was denied in 2002 because IHD/CAD was not presumptive, but it is now. I was rated at 10 percent in Jan 2010, so I filed a 21-4138 requesting my SC award be amended once the new ruling for IHD comes effective and also requested an earlier effective date than what was awarded in January to 2008 but wanted my effective date to 2001 under the Nehmer Law. Then in March 2010 I filed an NOD requesting an increase in rating along with an earlier effective under the new ruling. Then last week I submitted New and Material evidence in support of my claim and again asked for an increase rating, ect ect.. Three weeks ago I had to have 5 more stents inserted in the artery on my heart which now I have 12 stents in that artery. Without going into my entire heart disease except I had 5 bypasses in 1991 at the age of 41, since then I've had 8 heart attacks, Been on SSD since 1995 due to IHD/CAD and Depression and have not been able to work since 1995. This is all noted in my NOD's, 21-4138's and all other documents. Yesterday I received a notice from the VARO stating they were working on my claim for IU (new). I have never asked for an IU yet. I"ve asked for an increase in rating and earlier effective date. Why would the VARO start working on my claim as a (NEW) IU case when I have not requested it???...One, I don't meet the percentage rating to get IU anyway as I'm only rated at 10 percent for the secondary heart diseases and at 10 percent for SC of hypertension. Two weeks ago I submitted new and material evidence from my private cardiologist from three weeks ago when I had yet another heart cath. My ejection fraction was 40 percent when I had an echo done just before my heart cath. All these reports were submitted with an 21-4138. It was even documented in these records that my EF's had been as low as 10 percent up to 35 percent and also diagnosed with occassional congestive heart failure. IF and I ask IF the VARO awards me for IU will I still come under the AO Ruling for IHD/CAD once it's official and will they pay me back pay to when I first filed my claim and not when I reopened it under the Nehmer Rule. ???? Just curious.. In the notice I received from the VARO yesteday indicated they have my SSD payments. I'm submitting the VCAA and indicating I have no new evidence and ask that they make their decision. ALSO, This Monday, I have to have another chemical induced stress test by my private cardiologist because I'm still having chest pains and light headedness so he wants to see what the stress test will show. It's also documented in my private medical records that I have severe small vessel disease as well. Thank you. I hope this makes sense to you as I've had problems on other forums whereas they apparently don't understand just what I"m asking. And that pertains to WHY the VARO started a New IU claim on me..
  13. Thank you, I'll find another area to post this.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use