Bva With Remand To Amc

[jeeperrs]

I am new and posted much of what I am copy/pasting in another forum. However, I did not get much of a reply on that forum and thought I would try here. I will try to be as clear as I can, feel free to ask questions.

I will try to make this short and simple. I was discharged in 2003 for Supraventricular tachycardia. I found out after leaving the Army that they damaged my AV node and they took someone else's heart monitor and put my name on it (documented by VA cardiologist). The problem is that by putting my name on the other monitor and not my monitor, I received a 10% and not 30% rating in 2003. I have been fighting this for many years once a VA cardiologist pointed out the issue. I had a BVA hearing 2 years ago and just received my remand decision. I stressed the importance of the monitor that was miss identified and had a VA cardiologist document in 2009 that the heart monitor from 2003 was not my monitor and someone else's monitor. The judges remand said that I had to get current evidence, as that was too old of evidence for the increase in rating (she didn't once mention how I had false labs placed in my chart). This is my only issue that I have been fighting and I will post my timeline and then my questions. I have followed this board for 2 years but I can't seem to find an answer to this question, so I joined and am now posting.

Timeline (because I searched timelines all the time):

03/31/2009

Local VA Office Decision

RO

11/09/2009

Notice of Disagreement (NOD)

RO

11/16/2009

Appeal Pending

RO

03/17/2010

Statement of the Case (SOC)

RO

04/09/2010

Substantive Appeal (Form 9)

RO

01/11/2011

Supplemental Statement(s) of the Case (SSOC)

RO

07/27/2011

Certification of Appeal

RO

12/29/2011

Received by BVA

BVA

12/29/2011

Administrative Case Processing

BVA

10/15/2013

With VLJ

BVA

10/15/2013

With VLJ

BVA

10/23/2013

With VLJ

BVA

11/18/2013

With VLJ

BVA

11/19/2013

Pending Dispatch

BVA

11/19/2013

Decision & Claims File Dispatch

AMC

11/21/2013

Decision & Claims File Dispatch

AMC

Since it is now at the AMC you can all understand that I am in a remand.

My letter:

The Issue: Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for supraventricular tachycardia.

The introduction states:

This matter comes before the BVA on appeal from March 2009 rating decision issued by the VA RO in Muskogee, OK.

They had a quick review of my hearing and additional evidence

This paragraph was in bold and one of my questions (I was never seeking a secondary issue):

The issue of entitlement to service connection for degenerative mitral valve disease, to include as secondary to service-connected supraventricular tachycardia, has been raised by the record, but has not been adjudicated by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). Therefore, the board does not have jurisdiction over it, and it is referred to the AOJ for appropriate action.

The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the AMC in Washington DC.

Questions:

1) Can I not do anything about them discharging me under false laboratory findings, as I have a VA cardiologist and private cardiologist that says that is not my heart monitor?

2) I did not ask for the mitral valve to be a secondary condition but additional evidence to the chronic supra ventricular tachycardia. Are they starting their own claim to make this a secondary issue? What date do they use, my appeal or the order date?

3) They want evidence between the time I filed the appeal (when I found out about the errors in my medical records) but also said in the remand that I am to have an examination. The issue is that I had way more recorded episodes when I left the army than they want to use. However, the VA has agreed to count 4 recorded episodes but I need 5 recorded episodes to get the increase I am seeking. The examination criteria says "It is left to the examiner's professional judgment whether the veteran needs to be monitored by ECG or Holger monitor to satisfactorily complete this examination." but the requirements the BVA stated earlier said I had to have 5 recorded episodes. Should I allow the doctor to submit an opinion or require the doctor to put a 30 day holter monitor on me? I can get the needed recordings if they put a 30 day monitor on me.

4) Should I get a lawyer at this point? I have use VFW thus far.

Thank you for any feedback. I will probably think of more questions but these are the big four.

This was what I posted after talking to my VSO......

I finally got my VSO to return my call (they are 3 hours away making a day drive impossible with work). He suggested I fill out a DD form 149 and have the board review the MEB discharge and change my discharge from 10% to 30%.

As far as the secondary issue goes, he said the AMC will review the mitral valve and make a decision as secondary issue to the SVT. If they deny it, the BVA judge can then make a final ruling. I was told that it should most likely be approved because the judge implied that she felt it was raised by the record in her remand. That was promising news as I was getting frustrated.

I have not received anything from the AMC as of yet. I hope this doesn't take another 2 years for a blatant error the RO refuses to acknowledge.

Any additional comments will be appreciated.

[Berta]

WOW, a rating had been made.....and I know how difficult it is to wait for the outcome.

"Also, can I fight the date if the AMC rules in my favor starting in 2008 instead of from 2003? This is an issue that was from my MEB in 2003 and I hope to get my back pay to be from 2003. As you can read, the judge did not mention anything from 2002 and my medical records being mixed up with another soldier, which resulted in fewer recorded episodes and a 10% rating at the time (all noted by the VA cardiologist in 2009)."

The actual decision letter will help determine that....

[jeeperrs]

I will post the decision once I get it. Hopefully I will get it sooner than later. As of now, no changes are showing in ebenefits. I am assuming it will take special approvals, as it is a claim that has lasted for many years and my severance pay will be affected.

Edited March 11, 2014 by jeeperrs

[jeeperrs]

I was told today that an SOC was mailed on the 11th. I don't know if that is a good or bad thing. However, nothing has changed in ebenefits yet. Hopefully I will get the letter today, otherwise I may not sleep until it comes in the mail.

There was no BBE in the mail today. I will be checking the mail at lunch tomorrow (thankfully I have a morning mail delivery). I am impressed with how fast the AMC moved my claim through. My fingers are crossed that the SOC is good news.

I will document this process all the way to the end. I get frustrated when people start a topic and then just disappear. LOL

Edited March 13, 2014 by jeeperrs

[jeeperrs]

Ugh, the SOC still did not come in the mail today. Fingers crossed for tomorrow!

This came from IRIS today. I guess it is a reply from a message I sent last week.

Your appeal is being processed at the Appeals Management Center (AMC). A decision on the appeal has been rendered. You will be notified in writing once the decision has been completed.

Edited March 15, 2014 by jeeperrs

[jeeperrs]

FINALLY! I received my SSOC tonight and they awarded me 30% for my SVT. However, the AMC is only awarding retro to Sep 2009 because that is when they "captured evidence indicating 5 episodes in a year". It is odd that in one 24 hour period they recorded 5 episodes but when leaving the army they can only capture 4, plus they mixed one of my monitors up with another soldier. They are not mentioning the mix up of medical records when I left the Army in the AMC decision. Don't forget that they MEBed me for this particular condition.

Question: If I file a NOD for the effective date, will that screw up this decision and prolong the wait another few years?

Despite the effective date, I am so very happy that the fight is kind of over. I always told myself to just be happy if they fix it from this time forward but I would like for the past to be corrected. Thanks for making the board, I read it for years prior to commenting. I think it helped me make the correct decisions.

[jeeperrs]

This is what the SSOC had for anyone who wants to answer my question in the previous post.

The first page said:

Enclosed is a SSOC. It is not a decision on any new issues, but is intended to inform you of any material changes in, or additions to, the information contained in the SOC that we previously sent to you. The following information will help you decide how to respond. We encourage you to discuss this with your rep, if you have one.

Your appeal was previously remanded by the BVA for further development, which has been completed. Before returning your appeal to the Board, we are giving you a period of time to respond with additional comments or evidence. Please note that a response at this time is optional and is not required to continue your appeal.

If you wish to respond, you have 30 days from the date of this letter to respond. There is no special form to use. You can simply write to us and tell us in your own words what you disagree with in the is SSOC and why

If you do not wish to respond, and you do not want us to wait for the 30 days to expire, you can write to us and let us know that. If you do not respond, the Board will consider what you have already submitted in deciding your appeal.

The next page states the Issue, Evidence, Adjudicative Actions, and thenPertinent laws; regulations; rating schedule provisions. This went on for 12 pages. The 13th page had:

Decision: Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for SVT is granted with an increase rating of 30 percent disabling

Reasons and Bases: The appeal was remanded by the BAV for evidential development, VA (Heart) Examination, and re-adjudication of the issue currently before the BVA.

The evaluation of SVT is increased to 30 percent disabling effective Sep 24, 2009.

An evaluation of 30 percent is assigned from Sep 24, 2009 and the effective dat is based upon the examination findings

A review of your VA (Heart) Examination dated 2/24/2014 the examiner provided the following medical findings and opinion.

The information in VBMS was reviewed to include outpatient treatment records for the periods from Jan 2009 to present. Particular attention was directed toward the Holter monitor report dated 9/24/09. This report documents "Frequent (up to 13% of recording) runs of ectopic atrial rhythm and ectopic atrial tachicardia with rate up to 177 bpm are noted.

In this Holter monitor tracing of 9/24/2009 there are 5 discrete episodes of atrial tachycardia within the 24 hour period, occurring at 0803, 0935, 1430, 1624, and 1954. Each episode lasts for several beats, with the last documented episode noted on the tracing to last 1255 beats for a duration of 3 minutes.

Taking this information into consideration it is this examiner's opinion that it is more likely than not that there is evidence documenting more than four episodes per year of atrial tachycardia during the period of January 2008 to present.

We have assigned a 30 percent evaluation for your SVT based on: Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, with more than four episodes per year documented by Holter monitor.

This is the highest scheduler evaluation allowed under the law for this condition

This decision represents a full and final determination before the BVA.

Any thoughts to get the date back to when I left the Army?

Edited March 17, 2014 by jeeperrs