Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules
- 0
-
Tell a friend
-
Recent Achievements
-
Our picks
-
VA Disability Claims: 5 Game-Changing Precedential Decisions You Need to Know
Tbird posted a record in VA Claims and Benefits Information,
These decisions have made a big impact on how VA disability claims are handled, giving veterans more chances to get benefits and clearing up important issues.
Service Connection
Frost v. Shulkin (2017)
This case established that for secondary service connection claims, the primary service-connected disability does not need to be service-connected or diagnosed at the time the secondary condition is incurred 1. This allows veterans to potentially receive secondary service connection for conditions that developed before their primary condition was officially service-connected.
Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)
The Federal Circuit ruled that pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosed condition, can constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes if it results in functional impairment 1. This overturned previous precedent that required an underlying pathology for pain to be considered a disability.
Effective Dates
Martinez v. McDonough (2023)
This case dealt with the denial of an earlier effective date for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) 2. It addressed issues around the validity of appeal withdrawals and the consideration of cognitive impairment in such decisions.
Rating Issues
Continue Reading on HadIt.com-
- 1 review
Picked By
Tbird, -
-
Are all military medical records on file at the VA?
RichardZ posted a topic in How to's on filing a Claim,
I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful. We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did. He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims. He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file. It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to 1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015. It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me. He didn't want my copies. Anyone have any information on this. Much thanks in advance.-
- 4 replies
Picked By
RichardZ, -
-
Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
Tbird posted a record in VA Claims and Benefits Information,
Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL
This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:
Current Diagnosis. (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)
In-Service Event or Aggravation.
Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”-
- 0 reviews
Picked By
Tbird, -
-
Post in ICD Codes and SCT CODES?WHAT THEY MEAN?
Timothy cawthorn posted an answer to a question,
Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability ratingPicked By
yellowrose, -
-
Post in Chevron Deference overruled by Supreme Court
broncovet posted a post in a topic,
VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.
They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.
This is not true,
Proof:
About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because when they cant work, they can not keep their home. I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason: "Its been too long since military service". This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA. And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time, mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends.
Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly. The VA is broken.
A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals. I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision. All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did.
I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt". Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day? Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.Picked By
Lemuel, -
-
Question
allan
2-METHYLCYCLOPENTADIENYL MANGANESE TRICARBONYL CAS: 12108-13-3; Chemical Formula: (CH(3))C(5)H(5) - Mn(CO)(3) H.S. No. 1271
OSHA formerly had no limit for 2-methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl (Cl-2). The ACGIH has a TLV-TWA of 0.2 mg/m(3), measured as manganese, with a skin notation. The proposed PEL was 0.2 mg/m(3) as an 8-hour TWA, with a skin notation; NIOSH (Ex. 8-47, Table N1) concurs. This limit, measured as manganese, is established in the final rule, along with a skin notation. Cl-2 is a dark orange liquid with a faintly pleasant odor; it is a complex organic compound containing about 25 percent manganese by weight.
2-Methylcyclopentadienyl Mn tricarbonyl is highly toxic in its concentrated form, causing adverse effects primarily on the central nervous system. It is somewhat irritating to the eyes but skin contact does not produce irritation or sensitization; however, Cl-2 is readily absorbed through the skin (ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387). Animal studies indicate that Cl-2 has a toxicity similar to that of tetraethyl lead and is highly toxic by all routes of exposure (U.S. Navy Smoke Abatement Additive, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387).
The single-dose oral LD(50) for rats is 23 or 39 mg/kg, depending on sex. The skin LD(50) for rabbits is 1692 + 145 mg/kg, and the 1-hour inhalation LC(50) for rats is about 350 mg/m 3 (The Ethyl Corporation, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387). Toxic exposures by all routes produce rapidly appearing symptoms of mild excitement, hyperactivity, tremors, severe clonic spasms, weakness, respiratory distress, and occasional clonic convulsions, followed by terminal coma (U.S. Navy Smoke Abatement Additive, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387).
Acute exposure causes damage to the liver, kidneys, and cerebral cortex, as well as changes in lung tissue (ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387). Browning (1966/Ex. 1-1018) observed chronic bronchitis, peribronchitis, interstitial pneumonia, and lung abscesses in animals that subsequently died from long-term inhalation exposure to Cl-2; exposure to Cl-2 concentrations of approximately 12 mg/m(3) for 100 days produced no deviation in weight gain patterns and no gross or microscopic changes in two dogs (Browning 1966/Ex. 1-1018). The liver and kidneys are the principal target organs associated with acute overexposures; the lungs of overexposed animals were hemorrhagic (Browning 1966/Ex. 1-1018).
In humans, skin contact should be entirely avoided. A 5 to 15-ml spill on one worker's hand and wrist was reported to have caused "thick tongue," nausea, giddiness, and headache within 3 to 5 minutes (U.S. Navy Smoke Abatement Additive, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387). NIOSH submitted the only comment on this substance.
In the final rule, OSHA establishes a PEL of 0.2 mg/m(3) TWA, measured as manganese, with a skin notation, for 2-methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl. The Agency concludes that this limit will protect workers against the significant risk of CNS effects and systemic damage, which constitute material health impairments and are associated with exposure to Cl-2 at levels higher than the new PEL. A skin notation is established because of Cl-2's demonstrated ability to penetrate human skin rapidly and to cause systemic effects.
SOURCE: http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.sh...ES&p_id=770
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
2
1
Popular Days
Dec 21
1
Dec 22
1
Dec 23
1
Top Posters For This Question
allan 2 posts
Stretch 1 post
Popular Days
Dec 21 2007
1 post
Dec 22 2007
1 post
Dec 23 2007
1 post
2 answers to this question
Recommended Posts