brokensoldier244th

I agree, they don't. I have to get into the weeds with Quality raters sometimes to justify actions that I take on the claims that I work. 3.156 addresses evidence that was previously submitted but not considered due to VA error, or subsequent evidence that clearly shows that the contention should have been rated X from Y date instead of whatever they decided originally, and since you were appealing for an EED the general rules do not apply. In the abstract, most veterans that file a claim after a decision closes that isn't based on something like EED, or 1151 (VA malpractice), or some special OIG review, will fall under the rule that the effective date is the date of the new claim since it was not a continued appeal. We all kinda got off the subject of the OP, though- he was asking why evidence submitted after the decision wasn't considered as part of the prior claim. Who said LandNav was easy, right?

You'll have to send a 4318, or call to verify what is showing, there is more than 1 place to update addresses within VA systems and it sounds like one may have gotten missed. It would be faster to call.

Yup, and if you want to you can print off prior decision letters at VA.gov under your claims status, too. That way perhaps they could identify some other claim that may have not been rated correctly, or if evidence was submitted but not listed as evidence in the decision letter.

If you wanted something more specific you could have asked. I was answering Rattlers general question.

They are all supplemental claims. The difference is in the recognition of the effective date. If you are alleging an EED or a CUE you are asking for that specifically and they have specific standards required, and specific things reviewed to determine if the effective date is correct. If you just disagree with a decision, it's also a supplemental, but outside of a year after a decision the effective date is that of the newly filed supplemental not the original claim.

You can, you just don't get the original filling date if you file the supplemental more than a year after the denial or rating.

Joint pain and fibro are pretty common MUCMIS (medically unexplained chronic multisystem illness) under CFR 3.317. Scroll down to section 'baby b' (lower case b) there is the list of MUCMIs that apply to SW Asia/Gulf https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-38/chapter-I/part-3/subpart-A/subject-group-ECFR39056aee4e9ff13/section-3.317 Also, https://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/gulfwar/medically-unexplained-illness.asp

Because it was closed. All evidence is admissible, up to the point of finalization- I see claims every day where its in a rating stage but not rated, but there is new evidence received- RFD (ready for decision) isn't 'closed' so it is added to the running claim. Once it has been finalized, though, that's it- it's done. You can argue for an increase based on New and Relevant information, or you could appeal the original decision, although it sounds like the info you would want to appeal with, while new and relevant, wasn't available at the time of the rating so it wouldn't be an error. Unless we had other known means of obtaining it, like 21-4142 auth to request it from your private providers but didn't, or you supplied it and it was overlooked it wouldn't be insufficient development.

Hey, Carson Basically, the fiduciary hub (a subset of the VBA/VSRs that deals with things like pension, fiduciaries, and check retrievals for errant direct deposits, among other things) will get with DFAS to figure out what was initially sent as severance, then go back through their own records to see what was sent out to you as disability compensation. It can take a while. How long is awhile? I can't really say- because I don't know, I don't work as a fiduciary and I never have, at least yet. Sometimes your DD214 lists severance in the remarks block. I think you can also go through the DFAS website and request pay records, but I know how far back. I have to do it sometimes in my capacity as a VSR to determine things like "Were you on AD as a reservist/NG when XYZ happened" if you or DoD/Dept of [Insert Service Here] doesn't have a complete record set of your duty weekends, ATs, Active Reserve or Guard, or deployments. I can usually get an answer back in about a week but it's just a printout of whatever date range I told them I was interested in. No editorializing or commentary, and it's often not columnized very well so it's a pain to read. Excel to the rescue!

We are never "just looking at one someone's claim " on its own. It's either waiting for something internally, externally, a tiebreaker opinion, or it's in a queue getting electronically shuffled to the next smallest workload. A vso can look at it and tell you. The phone people can't see much, they don't have the same access level that we so.

The steps for a supplemental are the same as for a regular claim. A VSR develops the new evidence, submits it for an exam if needed, or sends it to a rater. Sometimes the rater determines that something needs to still be done, so they send it back to a vsr. Vsr completes whatever "it" was, then sends to the ratings queue. After that it's dependent on what station pulls it down and how backed up they are. If it was waiting for a VA c&p result then it's also dependent on getting the results of that, too.

You dont need witnesses statements (buddy statements, 21-4138, 21-10210, whatever) but they help, in the absence of a memo or day orders or something that says"I burned stuff...". They aren't required to filte a claim, and you can file now and gather the stuff up afterwards.

It is because we use centralized posting and most claim mail comes into or goes out of that location.

At 15 yrs the amount of effort and documentation it would take to reduce would be considerable- at worst, and nigh impossible, other than fraud, at best. Plus, much if the time if your claimed contention doesn't span across other contentions we don't go digging anyway, no time and no reason.

If one of your SC conditions is 100 then a combined rating of 60 or higher for things not part of that 100% would be statutory SMC-S. Look up SMCs and you'll see that in some circumstances more that 100% is possible.

Generally, we don't. I don't look at older decisions on a regular claim unless it somehow impacts whatever the current contention might be (secondary) or, IU/Housebound/A and A. Otherwise we pretty much stay in our lane. RFE (requests for examinations) is still a thing, but highly reduced, because the computer sets the date 2,3,5 yrs out from when you get rated but now it comes to one of us for review before it just kicks out an exam letter. Keep in mind if I am looking through things for 1 contention and I find something egregiously incorrect (good or bad) I have to kick it up to a rater or quality to be reviewed to make sure the appropriate regulations in M21/38CFR were applied correctly- that's what I'm doing now on the subproject that I am working on. If we look at your PMR (private medical- if you have submitted- we don't just have access to that) or Capri (VAMC stuff) and you haven't improved, we cancel the exam. We aren't doctors but it doesn't take whiz kid to look at a range of several months or a few years of VAMC record, CFR38 Part 4 (ratings schedule), your current rating, and connect the dots to see if there has been a serious and sustained improvement over time and not just a 'good day'.

All it’s going to do is add time and another likely exam, whereas the chronic pain and ptsd can be looked at in one go if you do it now.

They rated it then and always have, its more that the way it is put together as a claim when we develop it is different and definitely more consistent.

It would be combined as it is classified as a MH condition. The existence of it could, perhaps, increase a rating, if it is not currently being considered.

There is some pretty compelling evidence out there that chronic pain can be exacerbated by other MH issues, and it can be a symptom of MH issues as well. Its a pretty common comorbidity. https://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/treat/cooccurring/chronic_pain_guide.asp

Your company also gave you incorrect or incomplete information, FYI.

If you have a well-supported claim for PTSD/MST it's highly unlikely that it will be rated less than your chronic pain. Raters have to go with the higher rating, anyway, not the lower one. Your chronic pain will still be rated under mental, but collectively with the rest. Due to pyramiding restrictions, you can't have more than 1 MH rating.

You can file for multiple things under 1 'system' though it may get lumped in together on the same claim. It depends on where your current claim is in the process. If it's being rated but not finalized and you file something now then your current claim will have these new contentions added to it. Chronic pain is considered Mental, but it's obviously not PTSD or MST. Your current claimed contentions for MST/PTSD would likely have chronic pain subsumed within them, but you would also have to have a separate mental examination C&P because PTSD and MST have very specific things that are asked and looked at, and only specific people can do those types of exams and write the opinions required. I work remotely for the MST Operations Center in San Juan. 95% of what I've done in the last 2 yrs has been exclusively MST claims, and, as a side project, an OIG review of about 9000 prior denied MST claims that may have been wrongfully developed and/or denied, or may have the wrong effective date. So, if you want to PM me any questions I'm open to it. MST claims are only worked by certain VSR's that are trained for it, and it has been that way for a few years now. Incidentally, I'm representing our RO in June in DC at a national symposium about MST, treatment, claims development, and military strategies to prevent/mitigate/support veteran survivors of MST. I've read and seen pretty much anything you could imagine at this point but how specific you want to get if you PM me is totally up to you.

Also true. Nothing can be done about that, though.