http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109...09T5IVY6:e4394:

Halfway down ----

I hope they will have access to Public comment before this gets into 38 CFR-

"(g) Effective Date-

(1) IN GENERAL- The amendments made by this section shall take effect six months after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(2) REGULATIONS- The Secretary shall prescribe the regulations, if any, to be prescribed under the amendments made by subsection (a) not later than the date specified in paragraph (1).

(3) CLAIMS- The amendments made by subsections (, ©, (d), and (e) shall apply to claims submitted on or after the date specified in paragraph (1)"


Question- only applicable to claims filed on or after the date the regs begin??????
that would put many vets with current claims and the desire for legal representation right into the crapper-

This part bothers me too---

`"(2) The Secretary may prescribe in regulations qualifications and standards of conduct for individuals recognized under this section, including a requirement that, before being recognized, an individual--

`(A) show that such individual is of good moral character and in good repute, is qualified to render claimants valuable service, and is otherwise competent to assist claimants in presenting claims;

`( has such level of experience and specialized training as the Secretary shall specify; and

`© certifies to the Secretary that the individual has satisfied any qualifications and standards prescribed by the Secretary under this section"

In essense could the VA say that an attorney who might prepare a brief or whatever to support the vet's claim might have-per the VA -not enough experience ,competency, or rationale?
They sure try to knock us down when we try to supply medical evidence saying we are not competent to do that-

This gets me :


`(A) show that such individual is of good moral character and in good repute, is qualified to render claimants valuable service, and is otherwise competent to assist claimants in presenting claims;

Good moral character and good repute- I have no doubts that this exemplifies everyone employed at the VAROs
But the rest of this statement-
heck if we had that from the VA we would not need lawyers.
It is almost like the lawyers will have to have a higher standard of ability than the RO employees!

Abut 2-3 years ago the VA published a new reg and did not allow the public to have any inout into it- I forget what reg this was-----
there was quite a bit of hoopla from the vet orgs.

In this case if public comment is allowed (and I think it is a matter of law that it is allowed) I bet the DAV and other paid vet orgs will sure comment against the reg-
veterans should be quick to file a comment if they can-and it goes usually into the fed register
or is reffered to in some way.

What gets me here Terry is that they appear to be discriminating against veterans who have claims already filed and who need real legal representation yet this applies only to claims filed on or after the regs go through ?

So no one here -with a claim already filed- can benefit from this reg?

I thought -when this news first came out -the regs would involve all claims that had been denied and for which a NOD had already been filed and these would hold the right for the vet to hire an attorney.

I wonder if there are vets out there holding back from filing for the official reg date-so they can file via an attorney-
but they loose a better EED if they do that.