Jump to content
  • Donation Box

    Please donate to support the community.
    We appreciate all donations!
  • Advertisemnt

  • 14 Questions about VA Disability Compensation Benefits Claims


    When a Veteran starts considering whether or not to file a VA Disability Claim, there are a lot of questions that he or she tends to ask. Over the last 10 years, the following are the 14 most common basic questions I am asked about ...
    Continue Reading
  • Ads

  • Most Common VA Disabilities Claimed for Compensation:   


  • Advertisemnt

  • Advertisemnt

  • Ads

  • Can a 100 percent Disabled Veteran Work and Earn an Income?

    employment 2.jpeg

    You’ve just been rated 100% disabled by the Veterans Affairs. After the excitement of finally having the rating you deserve wears off, you start asking questions. One of the first questions that you might ask is this: It’s a legitimate question – rare is the Veteran that finds themselves sitting on the couch eating bon-bons … Continue reading

Sponsored Ads

  •  ad-free-subscription-002.jpeg     fund-the-site.jpg

  • Searches Community Forums, Blog and more

  • 0

Nehmer AO DIC CUE EED denied


I hope this situation never comes up here but this is why advocates need to really read Nehmer before they opine on any Nehmer claim from a survivor.

The veteran ( Vietnam Vet) died in 1977 due to heart disease. The widow's claim was denied for DIC.

After the 2010 AO IHD regulations came out, she was awarded DIC from, the RO , with an EED of  August 1, 2013.

"Under the circumstances, the RO was not authorized to pay the appellant DIC benefits more than one year prior to the date of receipt of her application for DIC benefits in August 2014, and the claim must be denied. 38 C.F.R. § 3.816."


(38 CFR 3.816 is the Nehmer AO regulation ( 2010)

The claim was at the BVA because the widow had filed CUE, thinking her EED for DIC should have been Novermber 1977( date of the veteran's death)

This facet of Nehmer is why she and any other Nehmer claimant cannot obtain an EED outside of the parameters of the Nehmer decision.

"The Veteran is a Nehmer class member. Specifically, the record shows that the Veteran served in the Republic of Vietnam, and that service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death has been granted based on presumptive service connection for ischemic heart disease, based on presumed exposure to herbicides during such service. As such, he is a Nehmer class member. However, the appellant did not have a claim for service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death that was denied between September 25, 1985, and May 3, 1989, nor did she did submit a claim for service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death between May 3, 1989, and August 31, 2010, the date on which the liberalizing law added ischemic heart disease as a disease presumptively due to in-service exposure to herbicides became effective. See 75 Fed. Reg. 53,702 (August 31, 2010). As such, the effective date must be assigned pursuant to 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.114 and 3.400. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.816 (c)(4)."

(Source- above BVA link)

The decision also contains the description of IHD thus:

"The rules for effective dates for disability compensation awarded to Nehmer class members are set forth at 38 C.F.R. § 3.816. Under that regulation, a Nehmer class member is a Vietnam Veteran who has a covered herbicide disease. Covered herbicide diseases include ischemic heart disease (to include atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and coronary artery disease). See 38 C.F.R. § 3.816 (b) (2016). In this case, the Veteran had a "covered herbicide disease" (i.e., ischemic heart disease (to include atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and coronary artery disease)) within the meaning of 38 C.F.R. § 3.816 (b)(2)."


"ORDER An effective date prior to August 1, 2013 for a grant of Dependency and Indemnity Compensation based on service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, to include on the basis of clear and unmistakable error in a November 1977 rating decision, is denied."

I believe we have had only one situation like this here, whereby a vet member was trying to help a widow ,and the widow did not have a basis for more AO DIC retro due to the filing dates that are in the actual Nehmer Court Order as well as in 38 CFR 3.816.

The widow in the BVA case here was represented by the California Department of Veterans Affairs on the appeal.

I cant figure out why they represented her- maybe they thought she was going to succeed on the CUE,or maybe they were unable to convince her that the regulations would not support her claim of CUE-yet they still remained as her POA.....

or maybe they didnt even read the Nehmer decision and regulations at all.

Obviously the widow didnt read it either.

DIC back to 1977 would have been quite a windfall, but the regulations do not support her claim.

I feel sorry for the widow if she really expected to get 36 more years of DIC.

Just putting it here in case we ever get a similar situation.




Edited by Berta
added more

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Ads

  • Ad

  • Latest News
  • Our picks

    • I filed for my mitral valve regurgitation heart disease secondary to a service-connected condition on 7-30-18. It was granted on 8-30-18. Since I filed for this heart valve issue and was awarded, can I still file for hypertension ? I have been seeing comments that you should file for hypertension first and file for heart disease as a secondary. Can I file for hypertension as a secondary to my heart disease ? I am alittle confused on this matter.

    • How to Change the Theme - Look and Colors
      How to Change the Theme - Look and Colors
      • 5 replies
    • For Calculating Retro

      VA Disability Compensation Rates 2012 | 2011 | 2010-2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999

      Prior to 1999 check here https://www.hadit.com/va-disability-compensation-rates-historic-for-retro-calculation/
      • 0 replies
    • I am a 100% disabled veteran, At first I was super excited to find out I am getting retro pay for back benefits to 2006. But that was over 2 months ago. I been waiting and waiting and calling to ask them wheres my back pay. They first told me "one month" than I call again. The guy started reading a script of basically "we are malingering on paying you" type crap. I was wondering if there is any number I can call besides that 800-827-1000 number to inquire about my status. I don't know why its taken so long when there is specific information telling them from the judge that VA owes. 

      There was a remanded to see if I was eligible for IU (I get it now since 2014 im actually 90% with 10 of that been IU). I been on SS since 2004. Can Someone help me out? Thank you
      • 6 replies
    • You might have a 38 CFR 3.156 situation-

      meaning the VA might have considered your claim in 95/96 as "not well grounded" and failed to even get your STRs.Or they did get your STRs but never considered the specific entry you cited here.

      Lots of discussion under a search, of 38 CFR. 3.156 (a)(b) (c) ---here is a winner:



        • Thanks

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines