need more information

[BUZZ]

I get different answers to this question,I ask this a long time ago,if someone has cad and gets 10% for it and now has trouble with his lungs.Could you fill for a secondary condition for cad (could the lung problem be related to the cad

[Berta]

You would need a strong medical opinion from an independent doctor to determine whether the lung condition is secondary to the CAD.

With the 100% you have now, it could be secondary to any other SC disability you have as well.....but the key word there is "could" and that too would need an IMO/IME.

[BUZZ]

Thank You Berta, this information that I wanted to know is for my vn friend,trying to help him.

[Berta]

If he is an incountry Vietnam vet with SC for CAD ( IHD-Nehmer ) his 10% rating might  probably be way too low,if it derives from an older rating decision..

The VA changed their heart disease ratings some years ago, and that influenced some retro IHD ratings under Nehmer.

Can he join us here?

[Cudjoeguy]

I recently filed for disability for IHD as well as several other items.  I read alot here about the retro for Nehmer, I still don't really understand it.  Does it apply only to those who filed claims and were denied? Also filed for TYPEII, PC and tinnitus.  I was boots on ground in 66-67, watched them spray this crap from our perimeter.  This is my first claim so I'm just sitting and waiting at the moment.  Love this forum!  Jim

[Berta]

Footnote one is explained here and in many discussions as well in the AO forum:

It only applies to Nehmer 2010.

The favorable EED of Nehmer 2010  rests on a past denial of IHD,(CAD) or Hairy Cell B, or Parkinsons in a past VA decision.

I think I posted one of  Rick Spataro's email to me in this link.

He is the NVLSP head Nehmer lawyer and I checked in with him many times to make sure

I had explained Footnote One correctly here as it was the most important part of Nehmer III.

 

 

Edited March 15, 2017 by Berta

[Berta]

Here is Rick Spataro's email explaining Footnote One:

“As for your second question, if the VA should have coded IHD in a rating decision, the claim that resulted in the rating decision could be considered a claim for benefits for IHD under footnote 1 of the Final Stipulation and Order in Nehmer. It basically depends on the timing of the claim, rating decision, and evidence received while the claim was pending. It may also depend on the rules in the Manual M21-1 regarding coding that were in effect at the time of the claim.

Typically, though, the following example would be accurate: A veteran filed a claim for SC for a low back disability on May 1, 1990. The VA obtained medical evidence showing a diagnosis of IHD in the development of that claim. The VA issued a rating decision on April 1, 1991, but does not code IHD (list IHD as “NSC” on the code sheet of the rating decision). Under footnote 1, since the condition should have been coded in the April 1, 1991 decision, the May 1, 1990 claim should be considered a claim for SC for IHD under Nehmer. “

By "timing of the claim", claims regarding AO issues filed prior to Sept 1985 do not apply to Nehmer III.