Amc-bva

[VetsLady]

Hubby has a claim that was remanded back in March 09 for further development. Further development is done. AMC now has the claim and we are told it went to rating/decision on 9/10/09. Is there any reason why we can't call AMC to inquire as to the status of the claim? Don't want to step on toes, irritate anyone there and definetly want to keep a sharp eye on this. I received conflicting information elsewhere that AMC makes the decision then sends it on to BVA for final approval. Then, from another source, I'm advised that AMC will either approve or deny and should they approve, they will be the division that rates the claim. These were both from

1-800, who I know don't have the up-to-date info in their systems. I'd like to call the AMC directly - ideas?

Thank-you....

VetsLady

[Wings]

will do Wings-they have some info in the VBM about AMC but not much-

I think AMC is just a clip joint

x

x

x

My understanding is that the AMC is controlled by the "Chief Benefits Director of the VBA" --didn't he just RETIRE LOL! ~Wings

See CITATION: VAOPGCPREC 07-92 

Vet. Aff. Op. Gen. Couns. Prec. 07-92 

5.  In 1972, VA, by regulation, voluntarily adopted the policy of affording the public notice of and an opportunity to comment on proposed regulations in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 553.  38 C.F.R. § 1.12.  The Veterans' Judicial Review Act, Pub. L. No. 100-687, Div. A, Title I, § 102(a)(1), 102 Stat. 4106 (1988), made VA's compliance with APA rulemaking mandatory.  38 U.S.C. § 501(d). 

6.  The APA defines a "rule" as:

[T]he whole or part of an agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect designed to implement,  interpret, or prescribe law or policy or describing the organization, procedure, or practice requirements of an agency ... 5 U.S.C. § 551(4).  

Under the APA, VA is required to provide public notice and an opportunity to comment prior to the issuance of substantive rules.  5 U.S.C. § 553. A substantive rule that must conform to APA rulemaking is one that has the force of law and narrowly limits agency discretion. Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281 (1979); Guardian Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Federal Savings & Loan Insurance Corp., 589 F.2d 658, 666-67 (D.C. 1978). "A rule is 'substantive' when it 'effects a change in existing law or policy' which 'affect s individual rights and obligations."'  Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Quigg, 932 F.2d 920, 927 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (citing Cubanski v. Heckler, 781 F.2d 1421, 1426 (9th Cir. 1986) vacated as moot, sub. nom. Bowen v. Kizer, 485 U.S. 386 (1988)). "To be 'substantive', a rule must also be promulgated pursuant 'to statutory authority ... and implement the statute."' Animal Legal Defense Fund, 932 at 927.  See also  Chrysler Corp., 441 U.S. at 302-303.  

14.  The Chief Benefits Director is the head of VBA and is directly responsible to the Secretary for its operations.  38 U.S.C. § 7701(b).  "The primary function of the VBA is the administration of nonmedical benefits programs of the Department which provide assistance to veterans and their dependents and survivors."  38 U.S.C. § 7701(a); O.G.C. Advis. 65-90. Generally, the Secretary has delegated to the Chief Benefits Director authority to act on all matters assigned to VBA.  38 C.F.R. § 2.6(b).  More specific descriptions of the matters which have been delegated to the Chief Benefits Director are found in 38 C.F.R. §§ 2.50-2.55, 2.67-2.69, 2.72, 2.76, 2.78-2.79, 2.84-2.91, and 2.95-2.99.  While the Chief Benefits Director has been delegated broad authority to act for the Secretary in all matters involving the administration of nonmedical benefits, including making findings and determinations under applicable laws, regulations, precedents and instructions as to a claimants' entitlement to benefits under laws administered by VA, the authority to promulgate "substantive rules" has not been delegated to the Chief Benefits Director. In fact, such authority is specifically reserved to the Secretary.

[john999]

I guess if your claim goes from the VARO to the BVA and then to the AMC the VA can show that they are doing something. They are moving paper. They are making their numbers that they invent to do nothing while pretending to do their jobs. The bigwigs at the VA can go to congress and tell them that they have processed X number of claims when, in fact, they must moved them from one holding tank to another. Congress has no idea what is really going on, and really has no desire to know as long as they can somehow get the public off their backs.

[akwidow]

Good job, ladies - I can see the VA being called organized "Crime"!!

how about - "Modern Felons"?

[allan]

The VA has to answer to no one.

Not the President, not the Congress or the Secretary of the VA.

They are above and beyond the laws of this nation.

Challenge them & all you will see is a slap on the wrist with one hand & a pat on the back for cheating veterans till their death with the other.

Investigation after investigation has changed nothing. May as well try to change how & who the DOD awards contracts to. See how far that gets you.

Rico Act? Ask a rater if they're concerned about ever having fraud charges filed against them.

I don't think Mexico is as corrupt as the DVA.