Looking For 2 - 38 Cfr Regs Or M21 Rules

[carlie]

1)

Regs or rules pertaining to lost or misplaced SMR/STR's.

2)

Regs or rules pertaining to expeditious handling of claims

from claimants 75 years of age or older.

Thanks,

carlie

[Wings]

1)

Regs or rules pertaining to lost or misplaced SMR/STR's.

2)

Regs or rules pertaining to expeditious handling of claims

from claimants 75 years of age or older.

Thanks,

carlie

x

x

x

There's these:

RECONSTRUCTING LOST/MISSING MILITARY HEALTH RECORDS

(Non-Fire Related) http://www.thememoryhole.org/nara/nprc/CRG/Lostmeds.html

LOST AND MISSING SERVICE RECORDS

(Non-Fire Related) http://www.thememoryhole.org/nara/nprc/CRG/Lostpers.html

[RockyA1911]

The Tiger Team expedites resolution of VBA claims for veterans over age 70 and claims pending over one year. Plans to implement the Tiger Team began in July 2001, and the team became operational in November 2001. The Tiger Team's goal fluctuates each month, but is never less than the completion of 1,380 claims per month. Through the end of September 2006, the Tiger Team has completed over 80,000 claims. The Tiger Team is responsible for developing needed evidence, preparing rating decisions, and processing award actions.

The Tiger Team is located in Cleveland, OH

Edited February 5, 2010 by RockyA1911

[Pete53]

Thanks Rocky I agree that VA should expedite claims for older Veterans. The rest of us should wait in line

[carlie]

Thanks to all,

I more looking for things like the below,

maybe even a court case or two.

carlie

VA has a duty to assist the appellant in the development of

the claim. This duty includes assisting the appellant in the

procurement of service medical records and pertinent

treatment records and providing an examination when

necessary. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159.

The Board notes that the National Personnel Records Center

(NPRC) has reported that the appellant's records may have

been lost in a fire at that facility. The United States

Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has held that in

cases where records once in the hands of the government are

lost, the Board has a heightened obligation to explain its

findings and conclusions and to consider carefully the

benefit-of-the- doubt rule where applicable. See O'Hare v.

Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 365, 367 (1991). The analysis below

has been undertaken with this heightened duty in mind.

Jurisprudential precedent does not, however, lower the legal

standard for proving a claim for service connection; but

rather, increases the Board's obligation to evaluate and

discuss in its decision all of the evidence that may be

favorable to the claimant. See Russo v. Brown, 9 Vet. App.

46 (1996).