Nehmer Footnote One

[Berta]

There are ten pages a hadit of discussion mentioning Footnote One here if you put Footnte one into the search feature.

I just bumped up again two posts that contain the link to NVLSP's Agent orange email addy and an explanation of Footnote one in our Agent Orange forum.

Also the entire Training Letter is in our AO forum too- regarding the 3 new presumptives.

165 pages- advocates or veteran claimants don't need to read it all - but they should all definitely read the important parts.

[Berta]

I am bumping this up because, although there is Plenty of Footnote One info here already on Nehmer 2010, there is a possibility that NVLSP would add Footnote One provisions to any new AO presumptives the Secretary might want to put onto the AO presumptive list based on the recent former IOM , now NAM report.

Minutes ago I made a point I have made here many times,that bears repeating:

"Any vet getting SC for the same condition that had been denied in the past should always seek whether a CUE occurred in the past decision.

If the rating was at least at 10% (or should have been based on the medical evidence they had) and it was denied- it is just common sense that many NSC conditions become SC eventually , when we fight them, and those conditions  also usually get worse ,than they were when VA first denied the older claim for the same condition.

Unfortunately there is nothing in 38 USC, or 38 CFR, or M21-1MR to require  the VA to use  plain old common sense."

I am sure you all realized that Footnote One alleviated the need for any AO incountry Vietnam Vet vet awarded under 2010 Nehmer to have to file CUE on any past decision, that contained a NSC rating for  heart disease, Parkinsons, and/or Hairy Cell B.

And the best part too of Footnote One was not if the disability was ever coded, because if proven it "should have been coded", that allowed Footnote One to be applied to AO claimants like me.

No past rating or diagnostic code at all for my husband's IHD.I proved it "should have been coded" but wasnt because it was a malpracticed condition.I had a CUE pending on that,as an 1151 issue,  but even if no CUE had been pending, the results would have been the same-

The CUE was awarded but even without the CUE, Nehmer rendered 6 years back to 1988 (I think at 50% forget) for AO IHD....because this was a proven malpractice issue.

So I hope that Footnote one will kick in again on any new presumptives, because NVLSP kept a lot of claimants out of some ridiculous backlog, by developing Footnote One.

Hope that all made sense. I have seen a few guests searhing for Nehmer, Fotenote One, AO, etc lately as I bet they are hoping to become Nemer claimants ,under -hopefully- some new AO presumptives.

I am asking Secretary Shulkin, soon, via snail mail, to add ischemic stroke to the AO list.

As a doctor he will get my lay medical rationale on that. My past FTCA issue he is aware of ,supports my  lay medical opinions in this regard

.IHD (ischemic heart disease) has the same medical nuances that a diagnosed 'ischemic' stroke has. Other types of strokes do not have that same medical cause- ischemia- so we will see what happens,when he considers what the NAM (IOM) report says on that and hopefully he will read my letter on it.

 

 

Edited December 3, 2017 by Berta

[fanaticbooks]

Also the entire Training Letter is in our AO forum too- regarding the 3 new presumptives.

165 pages- advocates or veteran claimants don't need to read it all - but they should all definitely read the important parts.

I'm assuming you are talking about the February 2011 revised version of TL 10-04. There are now 3 Nehmer guides: the original, the Sept. 2010 revision and the Feb 2011 revision.

Just a note....I have put a topic in the Training Letter Forum for the Feb. 2011 version but have not as yet put in its contents. I have made a link to the VBN topic where I did post it. I broke it into sections and included some of the changes I noticed in each section just in case it would help others.

Tbird and I are not making connections at this time concerning getting this put in. It will be awhile.

[Berta]

Yes-I use the 2011 version at the NVLSP web site -fanaticbooks-

I am sure that all the info a AO vet needs is here at hadit on the 3 new presumptives.You have done a SWELL job!

Most vets filing under the new AOs only come under Nehmer if the VA denied their claim in the past for what is now an AO IHD,HCB or Parkinsons presumptive claim.

or the VA failed to rate what is now an AO in a rating decision (Footnote One= Nehmer)

They don't need to read all the legal beagle stuff in the TLs if they have that older denial decision and were exposed to AO in Vietnam and have one of the new presumptives.

[fanaticbooks]

I agree, Berta. I am NO expert on the Nehmer stuff but know a lot of knowledgeable people have input a lot of good stuff explaining it in here.

I just wasn't sure if people knew there were multi-versions of this sucker.

Edited September 22, 2011 by fanaticbooks