Ramp new regulations posted.

[broncovet]

According to CCK law, the VA has posted some new Ramp Regulations, at least some of these were new to me:

https://cck-law.com/news/what-veterans-should-know-about-vas-proposed-appeals-reform-regulations/

According to this article, a Veteran "can" change which lane he is appealing, supplemental or higher level review.  

Also, there are now 3 types of Board decisions:

• Direct Docket. The Direct Docket, as VA refers to it in the proposed regulation, will be for veterans who do not want to submit additional evidence to the Board, and do not want a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge. In this docket, the Board will look only at the evidence that was in the file when the appealed decision was issued.
• Hearing Docket. As the name suggests, this docket is for veterans who want to have a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge. The proposed regulations state that the only hearing options available to veterans in the new system will be a videoconference hearing and a hearing at the Board in Washington, DC.
  • Travel Board hearings, those held by Veterans Law Judges at the local Regional Offices, will only be available to veterans in the Legacy appeals system. Legacy appeals are those that were filed under the old appeals system. The Legacy appeals system is still in use, and all claims that are filed until Appeal Reform goes into effect will be filed in the Legacy system.
• Evidence Docket. The final docket is for veterans who want to submit additional evidence but do not want a hearing. In this docket, veterans can submit additional evidence to the Board with their Notice of Disagreement and within the 90 days following their Notice of Disagreement.

[KC3]

So according to part 7 bullet 2 the VA will not even consider the additional evidence I submitted for my appeal. They will also take the defective C&P exam I had for migraines where the doc didn't take my SMR in to account. Am I correct in assuming this.

I was told by my Veterans county superintendent and representative that  the evidence accumulated for appeal and after while waiting 30 months would by reviewed in the HLR. I just couldn't submit anymore evidence after it was submitted. 

Edited September 25, 2018 by KC3

[broncovet]

"Not knowing" VA rules and regulations do not exempt you from them.  I have not reviewed your file, so I dont know much about your claim and I can not say this means you can not submit new evidence.  Which part of RAMP did you opt into?   The higher level review?  If you made a hasty decision and selected "higher level review" instead of the other option, Supplemental claim lane, you have essentially told VA you DONT have any new relevant evidence, and to decide your claim on what you have.  

I have recommend, on hadit, to opt for the "supplemental claim lane" if  you are unsure of whether or not you have any new evidence.  This is the way we learn...we make mistakes.  If what I described is correct, you may not be able to submit any new evidence, however, you can try changing the "higher level review" into the "supplemental claim lane" if this has not been decided.  I know you can not "opt out" of ramp once you have opted in, but you may be able to change the lane, tho I dont know anyone who has done this except me.  

I went "the other way", opted into the supplemental claim lane, submitted new evidence, then told them I had nothing else to decide my claim based on the evidence on hand.  

You have to consider these choices carefully, and, as I explained, I can not see "any" benefit opting into the "higher level review" lane as it does exactly as you described.  Unfortunately you may have to live with that choice.  

However, if you get a denial, then you can submit new evidence  "at least" if you get a remand.  It goes like this:  You opt in for higher level review, unsure if you have new evidence (bad idea) so your claim goes faster.  Once you make this mistake its gonna take considerable time to fix it..its going to serve the opposite purpose..you probably wanted a quick favorable decision, which wont happen unless you carefully reviewed your file and made sure you not only had all the Caluza elements, but had symptoms documented as well.  

This all goes, IMHO under "Comer".  The VA has laid a "trap" for the unwary..you think everything is in your file, but there is that negative evidence and you need more evidence.  Read Comer vs Peake.  

[KC3]

Thank you; my veterans superintendent for county I live in is going to investigate for me. I may see if I can change to supplemental; just costs you the breath to ask.  He recommended HLR with the informal conference. I had plenty of 5 star evidence I gathered since my initial denial before I opted in. According to the letter for RAMP I received you can't submit new evidence after you opt in. I will read Comer vs Peake this evening. 

I should have just insisted on supplemental to ensure all evidence is considered. I might be overthinking this. 

[broncovet]

I already have my "red flag" going up on your VSO.  Did he recommend HLR?  My view is that HLR should be trashed..there is no advantage to it.  The HLR is not faster, at least according to VA..both HLR and SCL are 125 days.  So, why "burn down the "new evidence" bridge if it does not help you?  

If you dont know if you have new evidence or not, then play it safe and opt in for SCL, not HLR.  If you dont want to get rained on, and you are going to a foreign country for 3 months, better bring your umbrella and raincoat...no you might not need them, but do you want to take that chance?  Risks are ok..as long as there are rewards for taking risks.  There are no rewards in opting for HLR.  

[KC3]

Yes, it was recommended that I enter on HLR. Maybe it is my ignorance for not insisting on Supplemental. I was informed that as long as all new and pertinent evidence in for my claim before the informal conference,  that it would be considered. I was waiting on a couple of additional IMO's and had them within 2 weeks of opting in. My VSO is not authorized to represent me in this so he is in contact with another organization that is representing me. They also said I would be able to insert new and material as long as it was in before informal conference. I believe I will call my rep and see about supplemental although I think it is too late. 

Also my opt in was in play before new regulations (which are only proposed)  and will let it be know in my conference if necessary.  Who knows maybe I will get one of the 5% that are decent and read the evidence that proves I had these atrocious things in service.