Publication of Proposed Amendments to 38 C.F.R. § 3.310 (TBI)
As promised on Friday, I have linked the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposed amendment to 38 C.F.R. § 3.310 regarding illnesses secondary service-connected to Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) at Federal Register – Proposed Change to 38 C.F.R. 3.310. The proposed amendment will now go into a sixty-day public comment period.
Further explanation is provided in the VA’s Notice of...
VA Proposes Change To Regulations Regarding TBI
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced today that they are publishing a proposed change to 38 C.F.R. § 3.310 regarding illnesses secondary service-connected to Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). The current 38 C.F.R. § 3.310 states “disabilit which proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury shall be service connected.” This is commonly called...
Congressional Hearings On VA Transition to Electronic Files
The House of Representatives’ Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs held a hearing on December 4, 2012, regarding the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) transition to a paperless VA claim system. The hearing, entitled “Wading through Warehouses of Paper: The Challenges of Transitioning Veterans Records to Paperless Technology”, included witnesses from...
Federal Circuit Opinion on Use of Lay Evidence
On December 5, 2012, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in King v. Shinseki regarding whether the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) properly considered Mr. King’s proffered lay evidence demonstrating that his back and hip disabilities were secondarily service-connected to his knee disabilities. The majority held that the CAVC correctly considered whether the Board of Veterans’...
Wounded Veterans Treated to Trip . . . And More About the “Backlog”
The news reports documenting the waiting time (“backlog”) for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to adjudicate disability compensation and pension claims are now published on an almost daily basis. That information is obviously of paramount concern, but I’ve made a command decision to balance out that information with something veteran-related that is positive.
The...
New York Times Article on Effect of Discharge On VA Benefits
The linked New York Times Article details a class-action lawsuit filed by Yale Law School “against the armed forces arguing that he and other Vietnam veterans had post-traumatic stress disorder when they were issued other-than-honorable discharges.” The article describes one Vietnam veteran’s fight to have his discharge upgraded after being court-martialed, presumably during...
COLA Increase Approved . . . And More About the “Backlog”
The linked Navy Times Article describes the effects of President Obama signing into law the cost of living adjustment (COLA) bill for veteran benefits. If you are receiving disability compensation, pension, or survivor benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), you will receive a 1.7% increase in the amount of benefits, effective December 1, 2012. However, veterans will not see...
CAVC Opinion in Cameron v. Shinseki
On November 28, 2012, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) issued an opinion in Cameron v. Shinseki. The CAVC held that the veteran’s attorney was not entitled to fees based upon a filed claim for increase in disability rating before the Regional Office (RO) when there was a concurrent, but separate, claim for a similar disability pending on appeal. Prior to the adjudication...
Gulf War Syndrome Explained
After the 1991 Gulf War, veterans were returning from theater with unexplained symptoms with no identifiable causation. In the subsequent years, scientific and medical literature have attributed these symptoms to exposure to toxins, chemical weapons, and/or bacteria. On a personal note, I returned to the United States in 2005 to discover that my unit at Camp Ar Ramadi was exposed to...
CAVC Opinion in Monzingo v. Shinseki
On November 21, 2012, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) issued an opinion in Monzingo v. Shinseki. The CAVC rejected the Veteran’s arguments that: (1) the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) provided inadequate reasons for denying service connection for the Veteran’s hearing loss; (2) relied on an inadequate medical examination; and (3) erred in finding the...