3 Ao Presumptives Published ?

[vperl]

Someone needs to check this out...

Canton Daily Ledger Posted May 03, 2010 @ 05:56 PM LEWISTOWN — On Oct. 13, 2009, the secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced his decision to establish presumption of service connection for three additional illnesses (Parkinson's disease, ischemic heart disease, and B cell leukemia) associated with Agent Orange/herbicide exposure in Vietnam.

On March 25, 2010, the VA published a proposed regulation in the Federal Register as part of the process to implement the decision to add those three diseases to the list of presumptive conditions related to Agent Orange/herbicide exposure.

The final regulation will affect a large number of Vietnam veterans, estimated to be at least 200,000 veterans.

"This is an important step forward in ensuring that Vietnam veterans are justly compensated for the adverse effects suffered by exposure to Agent Orange during their service to our country," said Andy Fyffe, superintendent of Fulton County Veterans Assistance Commission, in a press release.

Veteran service officers should file presumptive claims now for these conditions without waiting for the completion of the regulation process, the press release from Fyffe added. Filing these claims prior to the publication of the final regulation is important for effective purposes and it also allows VA to start the claims development process (conducting VA examinations, requesting supporting evidence, etc.) to allow for timely adjudication once the final regulation has been published.

Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation (VA&R) staff are in the process of reviewing the proposed regulation for public comment. A more detailed VA&R Bulletin containing effective date and other information will be issued following the publication of the final regulation.

In the meantime, direct questions or concerns to Ian de Planque, assistant director for Claims Service, VA&R, at ideplanque@legion.org or (202) 263-5762 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (202) 263-5762 end_of_the_skype_highlighting; or contact the Fulton County Veterans Assistance office at 309-547-7262 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 309-547-7262 end_of_the_skype_highlighting for a copy of the official bulletin released by the VA.

Also, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has issued a warning in American Legion Bulletin 16-10 to veterans not to disclose personal information over the phone to callers claiming to update, confirm, or verify VA-related information.

VA reports the fraudulent caller's mode of operation include asking for credit card numbers, bank routing number, and other personal and financial information. A recent fraudulent call reported by a veteran included the caller claiming to be a VA employee and stating that the veteran's medical card had expired. The caller would then ask the veteran to submit a check over the phone to renew the medical card.

VA warns to be leery of any call originating from (888) 555-1234 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (888) 555-1234 end_of_the_skype_highlighting for it is the number identified in the case above.Veterans with questions about VA services should contact the Veterans Administration at (877) 222-8387 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (877) 222-8387 end_of_the_skype_highlighting or their nearest VA medical center.

The Fulton County VAC office is located at 132 N. Adams St., Lewistown.

Copyright 2010 Canton Daily Ledger. Some rights reserved http://www.cantondailyledger.com/news/x1540368784/VA-publishes-proposed-Agent-Orange-presumption-regulation-for-conditions-warns-veterans-about-fraudulent-callers

[LarryJ]

The date of your claim (Effective Date) is the date that the VA will pay you from, IF you are successful in the pursuit of your claim.

Getting anything any earlier than the Effective Date is, in all likelyhood, a fantasy.

Personally, I had an injury in the military in the 1960's, all documented, complete with x-rays, orthopaedic doctor's (2 Navy Captains) report, sick call records, treatment records, etc.

The VA paid the claim, back to my Effective Date of claim. Which was 2003.

I WISH that I COULD get my Earliest Effective Date changed..........ain't happening!

[Honibe]

Please reference the M21-1MR, for what is accepted and considered an informal claim, and how long the veteran has to provide information, and what would their effective date be for a claim that is initiated over the phone.

The reference is

M21-1MR, Part III, Subpart ii, Chapter 2, Section D

For the record, I never stated this was the best way to open a claim.

I posted and I stand by my statement, that a Veteran can initiate a claim or re-open a claim by calling the VA 800#. And according the VA M21-1MR the Veteran has up to one year to provide any information the VA my request , and the date of the original telephone call or informal contact requesting consideration for a claimed condition (even if it is not on the proper form) will be processed with the date of claim being the date the veteran made his initial request.

[vperl]

Well, not all of the AO 3 will be settled at the same rate, as published in rules most IHD claims will be at 60%

[jbasser]

Please reference the M21-1MR, for what is accepted and considered an informal claim, and how long the veteran has to provide information, and what would their effective date be for a claim that is initiated over the phone.

The reference is

M21-1MR, Part III, Subpart ii, Chapter 2, Section D

For the record, I never stated this was the best way to open a claim.

I posted and I stand by my statement, that a Veteran can initiate a claim or re-open a claim by calling the VA 800#. And according the VA M21-1MR the Veteran has up to one year to provide any information the VA my request , and the date of the original telephone call or informal contact requesting consideration for a claimed condition (even if it is not on the proper form) will be processed with the date of claim being the date the veteran made his initial request.

The M21R is not a regulation, It is a working guide for the VA employees to do their jobs. The controlling factor is the title 38 cfr. In this spacific case it would be effective dates and these effect each Vet differently according to their period of service and the type of claim th ey have, Direct, Presumptive and ect.

You have quoted informal claim and I see your point but I do re iterate that the effective date is the date the claim is filed or the date the entitlement arose, whichever is later and the VA will usually go back a year if the latter happens or to the date of a spacific diagnosis or test.

J

[vperl]

The 3 AO's have had a long and ruff road. Suspect that we may actually get some actual awarding of claims by end of summer...

[Berta]

Yes-Durock - in some cases the Date of claim could still provide retro prior to the filing date.

Some cases-

personal example:

My husband had 30% PTSD SC from 1984 claim field.

At his death he had a claim for higher SC rating pending, also he sent them a TDIU form (1992)and filed a Sec 1151 claim in 1994 as well.

In Spring 1993 SSA awarded him SSDI solely for his PTSD.

In 1997 the VA rendered 2 posthumous awards.(I formally reopened these claim when he died)

They both succeeded with the EED for his PTSD retro-not back to his Sept 1992 VA filing date but back to the 1991 date that the SSA had given him.They awarded 100% P & for PTSD.

The medical rationale for the VA Award date that superceded his filing date was that the medical evidence for one year prior to fling his formal claim supported the earlier favorable EED for the PTSD retro.

In most past denied AO claims , a successful award under any new presumptive should trigger the EED back to the date of the original claim.(Nehmer COurt Order)

The VA made a statement recently (maybe in the Federal Register stuff)that the past claimed condition should be easily recognizable as a new AO presumptive.

WHat they meant in my opinion was -say a vet filed for a COPD claim due to AO and added that her COPD was aggravated by the DMII and was denied but at same time the VA listed the DMII as NSC on the older award rating sheet and gave a NSC rating for the DMII.But denied as secondary.

Then lets say the veteran only realized her DMII was due to her service in Vietnam as a presumptive and files a claim in 2010.

If the VA had stated that the DMII was denied as NSC in the older decision it is very likely this vet could well gain a very favorable DMII retro date in a staged rating back to the DMII denial.

In MOST cases however the VA uses the date of the claim or TDIU form to determine the retro.