Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

Chronic Presumptive Regs

Rate this question


Berta

Question

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode38/usc_sec_38_00001112----000-.html

(This type of claim pops up here from time to time and it is always hard for me to find the regs here. It pays to get them posted again.)

TITLE 38 > PART II > CHAPTER 11 > SUBCHAPTER II > § 1112

Prev | Next

§ 1112. Presumptions relating to certain diseases and disabilities

(a) For the purposes of section 1110 of this title, and subject to the provisions of section 1113 of this title, in the case of any veteran who served for ninety days or more during a period of war—

(1) a chronic disease becoming manifest to a degree of 10 percent or more within one year from the date of separation from such service;

(2) a tropical disease, and the resultant disorders or disease originating because of therapy, administered in connection with such diseases, or as a preventative thereof, becoming manifest to a degree of 10 percent or more within one year from the date of separation from such service, or at a time when standard or accepted treatises indicate that the incubation period thereof commenced during such service;

(3) active tuberculous disease developing a 10 percent degree of disability or more within three years from the date of separation from such service;

(4) multiple sclerosis developing a 10 percent degree of disability or more within seven years from the date of separation from such service;

(5) Hansen’s disease developing a 10 percent degree of disability or more within three years from the date of separation from such service;

shall be considered to have been incurred in or aggravated by such service, notwithstanding there is no record of evidence of such disease during the period of service.

(b)

(1) For the purposes of section 1110 of this title and subject to the provisions of section 1113 of this title, in the case of a veteran who is a former prisoner of war—

(A) a disease specified in paragraph (2) which became manifest to a degree of 10 percent or more after active military, naval, or air service shall be considered to have been incurred in or aggravated by such service, notwithstanding that there is no record of such disease during the period of service; and

(B) if the veteran was detained or interned as a prisoner of war for not less than thirty days, a disease specified in paragraph (3) which became manifest to a degree of 10 percent or more after active military, naval, or air service shall be considered to have been incurred in or aggravated by such service, notwithstanding that there is no record of such disease during the period of service.

(2) The diseases specified in this paragraph are the following:

(A) Psychosis.

(B) Any of the anxiety states.

© Dysthymic disorder (or depressive neurosis).

(D) Organic residuals of frostbite, if the Secretary determines that the veteran was detained or interned in climatic conditions consistent with the occurrence of frostbite.

(E) Post-traumatic osteoarthritis.

(F) Osteoporosis, if the Secretary determines that the veteran has post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

(3) The diseases specified in this paragraph are the following:

(A) Avitaminosis.

(B) Beriberi (including beriberi heart disease).

© Chronic dysentery.

(D) Helminthiasis.

(E) Malnutrition (including optic atrophy associated with malnutrition).

(F) Pellagra.

(G) Any other nutritional deficiency.

(H) Cirrhosis of the liver.

(I) Peripheral neuropathy except where directly related to infectious causes.

(J) Irritable bowel syndrome.

(K) Peptic ulcer disease.

(L) Atherosclerotic heart disease or hypertensive vascular disease (including hypertensive heart disease) and their complications (including myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure and arrhythmia).

(M) Stroke and its complications.

©

(1) For the purposes of section 1110 of this title, and subject to the provisions of section 1113 of this title, a disease specified in paragraph (2) of this subsection becoming manifest in a radiation-exposed veteran shall be considered to have been incurred in or aggravated during active military, naval, or air service, notwithstanding that there is no record of evidence of such disease during a period of such service.

(2) The diseases referred to in paragraph (1) of this subsection are the following:

(A) Leukemia (other than chronic lymphocytic leukemia).

(B) Cancer of the thyroid.

© Cancer of the breast.

(D) Cancer of the pharynx.

(E) Cancer of the esophagus.

(F) Cancer of the stomach.

(G) Cancer of the small intestine.

(H) Cancer of the pancreas.

(I) Multiple myeloma.

(J) Lymphomas (except Hodgkin’s disease).

(K) Cancer of the bile ducts.

(L) Cancer of the gall bladder.

(M) Primary liver cancer (except if cirrhosis or hepatitis B is indicated).

(N) Cancer of the salivary gland.

(O) Cancer of the urinary tract.

(P) Bronchiolo-alveolar carcinoma.

(Q) Cancer of the bone.

® Cancer of the brain.

(S) Cancer of the colon.

(T) Cancer of the lung.

(U) Cancer of the ovary.

(3) For the purposes of this subsection:

(A) The term “radiation-exposed veteran” means

(i) a veteran who, while serving on active duty, participated in a radiation-risk activity, or

(ii) an individual who, while a member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces, participated in a radiation-risk activity during a period of active duty for training or inactive duty training.

(B) The term “radiation-risk activity” means any of the following:

(i) Onsite participation in a test involving the atmospheric detonation of a nuclear device (without regard to whether the nation conducting the test was the United States or another nation).

(ii) The occupation of Hiroshima or Nagasaki, Japan, by United States forces during the period beginning on August 6, 1945, and ending on July 1, 1946.

(iii) Internment as prisoner of war in Japan (or service on active duty in Japan immediately following such internment) during World War II which (as determined by the Secretary) resulted in an opportunity for exposure to ionizing radiation comparable to that of veterans described in clause (ii) of this subparagraph.

(iv) Service in a capacity which, if performed as an employee of the Department of Energy, would qualify the individual for inclusion as a member of the Special Exposure Cohort under section 3621(14) of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7384l (14)).

(4) A radiation-exposed veteran who receives a payment under the provisions of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 2210 note ) shall not be deprived, by reason of the receipt of that payment, of receipt of compensation to which that veteran is entitled by reason of paragraph (1), but there shall be deducted from payment of such compensation the amount of the payment under that Act."

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Top Posters For This Question

0 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

There have been no answers to this question yet

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • Vicdamon12 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • ArmyTom earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • kidva earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • kidva went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • kidva earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Our picks

    • 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
      • 0 replies
    • 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
    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      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 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • 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.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use