• Announcements

    • How to get your questions answered.

      How to get your questions answered. A few observations, and requests of all members. All folks who come here are volunteers who do this on their own time and their own dime.To avoid burning out our best contributors please follow these guidelinesf you are reading a post and it reminds you of a question you want to ask, start a new topic, if you place your question in someone thread it will be difficult to distinguish your question from the original poster, you will get better results posting a new topic with your question. 1. Before Posting please do a search and see if your question has already been answered. If you find the answer print it out and put it in a file to use as a reference file, I find this helpful myself. 2. If you can not find the answer and you do post a question, please print out those answers and refer to them to avoid duplicate questions. 3. Refer to the Frequently Asked Questions4. Duplicate questions will come up from time to time but the keeping them to the minimum will lighten the load on the regular volunteers.5. Respect folks privacy do not request their personal phone numbers for claims help, it is inappropriate and not why they are here.6. Keep the topics focused on veterans issues, in closing Search first Search ... Ask second.it may save a lot of time or at the very least enlighten you.
    • Listen Live Every Wed 5:30 PM CST to SVR Radio, Veterans Issues are discussed with various guests.

      Listen Live Every Wed 5:30 PM CST to SVR Radio, Veterans Issues are discussed with various guests. Please check the little home I am carving out for our SVR partners. http://www.hadit.com/svr.html
    • A bit about Tbird and HadIt.com for those who've asked...

      The following is on my About page, but some have been asking how this all happened. So here is my little story. Tbird US Navy 1983 – 1990 E-6 HadIt.com the website domain registered Jan 20, 1997 the domain is registered and paid for through Jan 21, 2023 at which time I plan to register it for another 15 years Lord willing and the creek don't rise. I guess the best place to start is Jan 1991; I had gotten out of the navy Dec 1990. At my separation seminar, there was a DAV rep Jim Milton he told us to bring our medical records in and he would look through them for us and let us know if we should file a claim with the VA. Well, bless his heart, he opened my medical file, reads the first insert, looks me straight in the eye, and says you will be 50% for the rest of your life and he would file the claim for me. 50% was for surgery I had in the service. True to his word he met with me and talked with me for a long time filled out my paper work and urged me to file for PTSD. I would not file the PTSD claim, nor even discuss it. By Feb 1991 I had moved to the San Francisco bay area and was staying at a friends apartment and pretty much I was just a puddle. In desperation one night I called suicide hot line, I had no job, no idea about going to the VA. They talked with me for a long time and explained to me that I could go to the local VA hospital even if I did not have insurance. Now, I know what you are thinking if I was 50% why didn't I just go to the VA in the first place, two reasons 1, this was Feb 1991 and the 50% didn't come till May and 2, even if it had come through it is unlikely that I would have had the mental acuity at the time to put the two together. I relate this here because it is where so many of our brothers and sisters are coming from, perhaps where you started. Fuzzy and unsure, in pain and sometimes homeless they come to the VA hospital for help. And that is where I ended up. Up to the pysch ward I went, blah, blah, blah, a few days later I was released with a promise of a call from the out patient program, which I would soon be entering. Blah, blah, blah, after many missed communications, and no call backs I was at the Day Hospital everyday M-F. And this brothers and sisters is where I began to learn and formulate my plan for HadIt.com. Veterans, veterans everywhere…I spent a year in the day hospital and about another year at a sheltered workshop before I got back on my feet. So I just talked to veterans everyday waiting for appointments, waiting for prescriptions, waiting for a vet rep and I started to learn the system. While in the navy I was data analyst and had to learn a 5 volume manual and just about anything you were suppose to do was in that manual. So I figured there must be a manual on how to do a VA claim or at the very least regulations. So I found out about the Code of Federal Regulations, United States Code, Veterans Affairs Manuals and so on and so forth. Of course this was 1991/1992 I was living in a tiny studio apartment in a particularly bad neighborhood, working in a sheltered workshop making a nickel per envelope I stuffed throw in PTSD and you will see that it was a difficult task for me to get somewhere where they had copies of these, let alone that they would let me look at. And there was so much knowledge around me, it was like the gold rush in those days, I could just sit on a bench a veteran would sit down next to me a little conversation later I had another nugget, I made copious notes. Phone numbers to call, ask for this guy or that guy he'll give you the straight scoop and they'd slip me a piece of paper with a number on it. You want to read this regulation or that one and another slip of paper into my hand. I spent a lot of time on those benches watching the squirrels they gathered their nuts and I gathered mine :) So I'm thinking I could put a little handbook together print it out and hand it out at the VA. Or perhaps fliers. Still formulating, time goes by, 1994/1995 I am being treated for PTSD regularly and doing and feeling much better and I go to work for a company as a marketing systems analyst and I discover the internet. Well let me tell you that was perhaps one of the most significant life changing events I have ever experienced. And I might add finally a positive one :) It seemed only natural to me that surely there must be a website that contained all the knowledge I wanted, well as it turned out not so much, lots of stuff but I wanted to get straight to the claims information and there was a lot of stuff to wade through to get to it. So taking my lesson from the squirrels earlier I started to gather, gather, gather…and learn HTML and work as a marketing systems analyst and work my claim. 1996/1997 major PTSD cork blows and unemployed. Working my claim, working the website. 20 Jan 1997 register HadIt.com domain name right after getting off the phone with the VA and saying I've had it with this. As fate would have it the old DAV board goes down just as mine opens up and folks start to wander in. So HadIt.com has two main components the website which supports the discussion board with links, articles, research resources etc. The website starts to grow, I can't tell you how many times I had to switch servers for space and features. I continue on a downward trend and in 1998 ended up back home in St Louis living in my sisters basement in therapy and working it, I swear I would have swung a dead chicken around my head at midnight naked if I thought it would have helped. The website continued to do great during this time, I just stayed in the basement bought new software, new books, and learned how to make things work and I continued to use this knowledge to make HadIt.com better. My 100% finally came through from the VA and I had a friend who is an advocate who helped me thru my SSDI claim, he was literally at my side thru the entire process and that came through for me. My therapist and sister continued to try and get me to leave the basement, but to no avail. At some point in 1998 or 1999 I put a counter on the website and was shocked to discover how many visitors we were getting. Time goes by my sister gets married and I move from the basement to the upstairs, there is much celebration that Aunt T is living in the light again. More time goes by and I settle into my life in St Louis and spend more time on the site trying new things, finding more information. 2003 I buy my own home VA loan. For years now I have just considered HadIt.com my job and I get up every morning go to the office and work for several hours, take an afternoon break and see where the rest of day takes me. I have a place in the office to use the computer and a comfortable to place to read journals and articles and take notes. Blah, blah, blah so that is my story and HadIt.com's intertwined.
    • HadIt.com Pass It On Cards

      Hi I've updated our HadIt.com Pass It On Cards. They are in a PDF format you can print them out cut them there are 12 to a page. If you have found HadIt.com helpful and would like to pass it on to other veterans this is an easy way to do it.I hope you find them helpful, feel free to leave a few anywhere veterans gather, veterans centers, veterans hospitals, public libraries, be creative. Please make sure though, that if you want to leave some at any business you ask permission first.Here you go http://www.hadit.com...it_on_cards.pdf

Tbird

Admin
  • Content count

    2849
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Tbird

  • Rank
    Founder HadIt.com established 1997
  • Birthday 02/19/57

Previous Fields

  • Service Connected Disability 100
  • Branch of Service Navy

Contact Methods

  • Website URL http://www.hadit.com
  • ICQ 0
  • GooglePlus +TbirdHadIt

Recent Profile Visitors


3445 profile views

Tbird's Activity

  1. Tbird added a post in a topic My success at battling a bogus Patient Record Flag   

    Ginterkill you have a post awaiting approval you have attached a letter please remove personal identification information and repost.
    • 0
  2. Tbird added a question in (VA Claims Research) Veterans Affairs Claims and Benefits Research   

    There's more information on HadIt.com in addtion to the forum - Check it out!
     
    There's more information on HadIt.com in addtion to the forum - Check it out!
    Pages
    About MeAll VA Benefit ArticlesAll VA Claims ArticlesAll VA Law ArticlesAll Veterans Interesting Facts and ArticlesArmy Hospitals in VietnamBenefits CalculatorContact UsDefinitions, Terms, AbbreviationsDisability Calculator – Service Connected Disabilities CalculatorHadit.com Veteran to Veteran LLC | VA Disability Compensation Claims and VA BenefitsHow can I use the site?On FacebookPodcastPodcast ArchivePrivacy PolicyResource LinksSearchSearch ForumsSearch ResultsShopSite MapSocial StreamSupportive Services for Veteran Families ProgramSusan Avlia-Smith Founder VetWOWTestimonialsUse of the word Veterans in booksVA / Veteran News and some other bitsVA Claims Knowledge BaseVA National Formulary 2015VA Standard Claims and Appeals FormsVeteran Justice OutreachVeterans Affairs History In BriefVeterans Affairs Site for Homeless VeteransVeterans Survivor Dependent InformationPosts by category
    Category: Administrative practice and procedureAnimals on VA PropertyAdditional Compensation on Account of Children Adopted Out of Veteran’s FamilyEqual Protection of the Laws for Faith-Based and Community OrganizationsCategory: Alcohol abuseCategory: AlcoholismCategory: CemeteriesCategory: ClaimsCategory: CondominiumsLoan Guaranty: Adjustable Rate Mortgage Notification Requirements and Look-Back PeriodCategory: Day careCategory: Dental healthCategory: Disability benefitsSchedule for Rating Disabilities: The Hematologic and Lymphatic SystemsCategory: Drug abuseCategory: Flood insuranceCategory: Government contractsCategory: Government propertyCategory: Grant programs-healthCategory: Grant programs-housing and community developmentCategory: Grant programs-social programsCategory: Grant programs-transportationCategory: Grant programs-veteransCategory: Gulf WarGulf War Era Veterans Supplemental Pre-9/11 Report July 2015Category: Health careCategory: Health facilitiesCategory: Health professionsCategory: Health recordsCategory: HomeSearching Our SiteCategory: HomelessCategory: HousingFunding Availability Under Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) ProgramCategory: IndiansCategory: Indians-landsCategory: Individuals with disabilitiesCategory: LinksLinks – Diseases and Conditions Specific to the Military Veteran PopulationCategory: Loan programs-housing and community developmentCategory: Loan programs-IndiansCategory: Loan programs-veteransCategory: Low and moderate income housingCategory: Manpower training programsCategory: Manufactured homesCategory: MedicaidCategory: MedicareCategory: Mental health programsCategory: Mortgage insuranceCategory: NoneOIG Conducts Surprise Inspections of VBA Regional Offices After Identifying Inappropriate Shredding Practices at the Los Angeles Regional Office Aug 17, 2015Vet CentersVA FormsContributionsVeterans Affairs Fast Letters and Veterans Affairs Training LettersCategory: PTSDHow the Brain Purges Bad Memories – Scientific American90-613 Peyton v. Derwinski BVA90-312 Karnas v. Derwinski BVAThe Spartan PledgePTSD Does Not Mean You’re CrazyPTSD What Every Veteran Should KnowCategory: Public assistance programsCategory: Public housingCategory: Radioactive materialsCategory: Relocation assistanceCategory: Rent subsidiesCategory: Reporting and recordkeeping requirementsCategory: Rural areasCategory: SASHomeless VeteranIndividual UnemployabilityMarkers For Military Sexual Trauma Claims = EvidenceHow to Win a Military Sexual Trauma ClaimUpgrading A Military DischargeClear and Unmistakable Error Title 38FSAD Female Sexual Arousal Disorder VA Claims Title 38Veterans Affairs MathComp & Pen C&PSexual Healing After Military Sexual AssaultBad VA Provider? State Medical BoardSexual Assault Trauma SyndromeSecondary Conditions To PTSD Title 38Category: Security measuresCategory: Social securityCategory: StatisticsCategory: Supplemental Security Income (SSI)Category: Tbird's BlogThe 15 minute 1 issue visit at the VA Medical CenterEvernote A Great Way That I Keep All My Notes Together. I Love & Think You Will Too!ENTREPRENEURSHIP BOOTCAMP FOR VETERANS WITH DISABILITIESRingtones That Are Not Good In Your Therapist’s OfficeSkills v PassionThings I do to help with PTSD, I know I am bit oddModems remember the good old days when lights were red, green or yellowSound Off: Where The Military’s Rhythm Came From : NPRBlack Lab to help veteran with PTSD | News – HomeVA News Digital: Searching for homeless Veterans on LA’s Skid Row – YouTubeNational Geographic explores ‘invisible’ war woundsSnapshot of Our Nations VeteransDepartment of Veterans Affairs Statistics at a GlanceOperating My IPod After Taking My Anxiety MedsVA puts veterans at risk by providing incentive to rush claims, critics say – Washington TimesBrené Brown: Vulnerability researcherIt’s just a question of green beans, baffling dilemmas in lifeWhen at my lowest, the best thing I did for myself was become grateful.Navy SEAL brain study examines blast injuries | UTSanDiego.com18 Year Anniversary for HadIt.com VeteranVA Choice CardsReport: In New Scandal, Veterans Affairs Misled Public with ‘Fact Sheet’ – Time Warner Cable NewsSome Top Officials Knew of V.A. Woes, Before the Scandal – NYTimes.comThese Are The Questions Veterans Are Tired Of HearingAllies’ best war photographer in Army’s biggest battle – CNN.comMSPB upholds firing in VA scheduling scandalVA Compensation Rates Effective 12/01/2014Anger = Energy and Post Traumatic GrowthReality vs PerceptionValor is a gift.Video guide teaches vets how to start, grow a businessA New Leash On LifeQuotesThe Wait: Are you a VA claims waiter?I do not like PTSD…Category: TDIUUnemployability – From the podcastBradley v. PeakeCategory: Travel and transportation expensesCategory: UnemployabilityCategory: Unemployment compensationCategory: VA and Veteran News ArticlesAdvisory Committee on Homeless Veterans, Notice of MeetingPrivacy Act of 1974: Computer Matching ProgramAdvisory Committee on Women Veterans, Notice of MeetingArmy Times turns 75, still serving those in uniformAgency Information Collection (Notice of Lapse-Government Life Insurance/Application for Reinstatement (29-389) and Notice of Past Due Payment/Application for Reinstatement (29-389-1)) Activity Under OMB ReviewAgency Information Collection: (Per Diem for Nursing Home Care of Veterans in State Homes; Per Diem for Domiciliary Adult Day Health Care of Veterans in State Homes)Agency Information Collection (Foreign Medical Program Application and Claim Cover Sheet) Activities Under OMB ReviewAgency Information Collection (Application for Voluntary Service VA Form 10-7055 and Associated Internet Application)Agency Information Collection-The Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization Under OMB ReviewProposed Information Collection (Supplemental Information for Change of Program or Re-Enrollment After Unsatisfactory Attendance, Conduct or Progress, VA Form 22-8873) Activity: Comment RequestEnhanced-Use Lease of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Real Property for the Development of a Housing Facility on Approximately 3 Acres of Land in St. Cloud, Minnesota.Enhanced-Use Lease of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Real Property for the Development of a Housing Facility on One Parcel of Land Totaling Approximately 5.4 Acres of Land in Grand Island, NebraskaProposed Information Collection-Statement of Accredited Representative in Appealed Case; Comment RequestAgency Information Collection (Application for Fee or Roster Personnel Designation, VA Form 26-6681) Activity Under OMB ReviewAgency Information Collection-Clarification of a Notice of Disagreement Under OMB ReviewProposed Information Collection: Income, Net Worth and Employment Statement (in Support of Claim for Total Disability Benefits) and Application for PensionNotice of Establishment of Commission on CareSpecial Medical Advisory Group; Notice of Meeting-RescheduledLoan Guaranty: Maximum Allowable Attorney FeesSpecial Medical Advisory Group; Notice of MeetingPresumption of Herbicide Exposure and Presumption of Disability During Service for Reservists Presumed Exposed to Herbicide – HadIt.com Veteran To Veteran LLCFormer NJ Veterans Affairs employee sentenced for million dollar influence peddling – Watchdog.orgCategory: VA BenefitsVA Claims and Benefits Video’sVBA Videos2009 Veterans Affairs Annual Benefits ReportHISA Program – Veterans Affairs Home Improvements and Structural Alterations ProgramVA Dentistry – Veterans Health AdministrationVA Choice Card Jon Stewart’s Take – Worth WatchingVa Choice Card = More Va Lies – (VA Claims Research Forum Post)Veterans Burial FlagsProposed Cuts to the VA 2015VA Dental Insurance Program – Health BenefitsApplying for VA BenefitsVA Pension: Aid and Attendance Veterans BenefitVeterans Survivor Package For Dependent Spouses, Children and Parents of deceased Veterans.Category: VA ClaimsFailure to Submit to Medical Examination–Insistence on the Presence of an Attorney and Use of a Recording DeviceTen things veterans should know about burn pitsFacts & Figures About Veterans and SoldierAnalogously Ratings – Conditions Not In The Schedule For Rating DisabilitiesIs an OIF Vet also a Gulf War Vet?VETERANS’ DISABILITY BENEFITS: VA Can Better Ensure Unemployability Decisions Are Well Supported GAO-15-464Fully Developed Claim (FDC) Veterans Affairs Benefits VideosSexual Assault Trauma SyndromeVA Claims Glossary-Definitions-Abbreviations-TermsVeterans Attorney and Advocate VideosGulf War Illness – National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) at the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM).Veterans Service OfficersStatement of the Case Example – How to Read and Understand this VA Form (Video)Rating Reduction or Sever Service – Veterans Affairs ProceedingsU.S. Army Organizations in VietnamNew Rules for VA Claims As Of March 15, 2015Win Your VA ClaimDocumenting Your VA Claim – Examining your service medical recordsVeterans Affairs (VA) Claims For Disability Compensation ArticlesVA Claims – The Importance Of Understanding Exactly What Are The IssuesDSM-5 or DSM IV For VA Mental Disorders Compensation and Pension ExamDa Nang Harbor Interesting USCAVC No 13-3339 Gray v. McDonaldEbenefits Status MessagesFiling A Veterans Affairs Service Connected Disability Compensation ClaimLinks to Common Search TermsVA Disability CompensationVA Office of General Counsel 2011VA Office of General Counsel 2012VA Office of General Counsel 2014VA Office of General Counsel 2015Veterans Self Help GuideVA Special Monthly Compensation (SMC)Explore VA benefits: Overview of VA disability compensation and how to applyVeterans Service Officers (VSO)Vietnam War InformationWin Your Veterans Affairs ClaimIraq veterans in legislature want to protect PTSD dogsRestrict VA’s Individual Unemployability Benefits to Disabled Veterans Who Are Younger Than the Full Retirement Age for Social SecurityBenefit Tip Co-Payment ReimbursementVA Backlog…Looking Back…Nothing NewVeterans advocates: Stop the VA ‘hamster wheel’ disability appeals process – StripesDocumenting Your VA Claim Best PracticesDisability Benefits QuestionnairesVBA’s ASPIRE dashboardVeterans Affairs Claims Process and E-Benefits ProcessPopular Topics from VA Claims Research ForumsDSM-5 Criteria for PTSDEntitlement To Service Connection For Sleep Apnea, To Include As Secondary To Ptsd GrantedGetting Your Documents In OrderVA Math Explained. VA Math It’s Not Your Mother’s ArithmeticSpecial Monthly Compensation for VA Service Connected DisabilityThe VA Claims Maze – How To Be SuccessfulAdditional 100% Disabled Veteran BenefitsInternet Medical Research Printouts for Your VA ClaimGulf War Veterans InformationGlobal Asset Functioning Scale (GAF Scale)Diagnosis RequirementVeterans Affairs Historical Compensation Rates 1974 –Agent Orange Presumptive ConditionsAgent Orange Symptoms and EffectsVA Reexaminations and Reductions of Veterans DisabilityVeterans Affairs Claims ProcessRequesting A Copy of Your VA Claims Folder (C-File)Request Military Service RecordsVA Compensation and Pension Exam – Do’s and Don’tsA Veterans Benefits Raters ViewFully Developed Claims Veterans AffairsVeterans Affairs Claims Self Help GuideEstablishing Veterans Affairs Service Connection for Disability CompensationCategory: VA Federal Register AnnouncementsAdvisory Committee on Women Veterans; Solicitation of Nomination for Appointment to the Advisory Committee on Women VeteransProposed Information Collection (Fiduciary Agreement) Activity: Comment RequestProposed Information Collection (SURVEY OF HEALTHCARE EXPERIENCES; DENTAL PATIENT SATISFACTION SURVEY) Activity: Comment RequestProposed Information Collection (NCA PreNeed Burial Planning)Proposed Information Collection (NCA: Legacy (Historic Resources Education Program Research))Agency Information Collection: Access to Financial Records, 38 CFR 3.115.Agency Information Collection (Interest Rate Reduction Refinancing Loan Worksheet) Activity Under OMB ReviewProposed Information Collection (Foreign Medical Program Application and Claim Cover Sheet) Activity: Comment RequestProposed Information Collection (Application for Voluntary Service VA Form 10-7055 and Associated Internet Application) ; Activity: Comment RequestProposed Information Collection: From War to Home: Improving Patient-Centered Care and Promoting Empathy for “Operation Enduring Freedom” and “Operation Iraqi Freedom” (OEF/OIF) Veterans in the Veterans Health Administration Patient Aligned Care Team Demo Lab VISN 4Proposed Information Collection (VA Forms 21P-4706b, 21-4706c, 21-4718a) Activity: Comment RequestAgency Information Collection (Notice of Disagreement) Activity Under OMB ReviewProposed Information Collection (Direct Deposit Enrollment; International Direct Deposit Enrollment) Activity: Comment RequestAgency Information Collection (Survivors’ and Dependents’ Application for VA Education Benefits) (VA Form 22-5490) Activity Under OMB ReviewNational Research Advisory Council; Notice of MeetingSolicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Veterans Rural Health Advisory CommitteeSchedule for Rating Disabilities; Dental and Oral ConditionsUpdate to NFPA Standards, Incorporation by ReferencePayment of Emergency Medication by VAAgency Information Collection: VA Form 27-0820, Report of General Information, VA Form 27-0820a, Report of Death of Veteran/Beneficiary, VA Form 27-0820b, Report of Nursing Home Information, VA Form 27-0820c, Report of Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), VA Form 27-0820d, Report of Lost Check, VA Form 27-0820e, Report of Incarceration, VA Form 27-0820f, Report of Contact-Month of Death CheckProposed Information Collection (Award Attachment for Certain Children With Disabilities Born of Vietnam and Certain Korea Service Veterans) Activity; Comment RequestProposed Information Collection (Deployment Risk and Resilience Inventory) Activity: Comment RequestAgency Information Collection-Application for Accreditation as Service Organization Representative Activity Under OMB ReviewAgency Information Collection: Applications and Appraisals for Employment for Title 38 Positions and TraineesProposed Information Collection (Architect-Engineer Fee Proposal, VA Form 10-6298, Daily Log (Contract Progress Report-Formal Contract), VA Form 10-6131, and Supplement Contract Progress Report, VA Form 10-61001a) Activity: Comment RequestProposed Information Collection; From War to Home: Improving Patient-Centered Care and Promoting Empathy for “Operation Enduring Freedom” and “Operation Iraqi Freedom” (OEF/OIF) Veterans in the Veterans Health Administration Patient Aligned Care Team Demo Lab VISN 4Proposed Information Collection (VA MATIC Enrollment/Change); Comment RequestProposed Information Collection; Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) Telehealth in the Parkinson’s Disease Research, Education & Clinical Center (PADRECC), Healthcare Experiences of Patients With Congestive Heart Failure (CHF)Proposed Information Collection: Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) Evaluating Peer Notifications To Improve Statin Medication Adherence Among Patients With Coronary Artery DiseaseUniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards; Updating ReferencesProposed Information Collection: Evaluation of the Department of Veterans Affairs Mental Health ServicesAgency Interpretation of Prosthetic Replacement of a JointHealth Services Research and Development Service, Scientific Merit Review Board; Notice of MeetingsAgency Information Collection: Preliminary Independent Living (IL) Assessment, VA Form 28-0791Proposed Information Collection (VA Forms 21P-0847) Activity: Comment RequestProposed Information Collection (VHA Homeless Programs Project CHALENG (Community Homelessess Assessment, Local Education and Networking Groups) for Veterans)Agency Information Collection (Veterans Transportation Service Data Collection) Activities: under OMB ReviewProposed Information Collection (Notice of Lapse & Application for Reinstatement) Activity: WithdrawalAgency Information Collection (Description of Materials) Activity under OMB ReviewProposed Information Collection (Former Prisoner of War Medical History) Activity: Comment RequestSchedule for Rating Disabilities-The Endocrine SystemSolicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Advisory Committee on Disability CompensationVA National Academic Affiliations Council Notice of MeetingCertification of Change or Correction of Name Government Life Insurance, VA Form 29-586Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement for the San Francisco VA Medical Center Long Range Development PlanPrivacy Act of 1974; System of RecordsPer Diem Paid to States for Care of Eligible Veterans in State Homes; CorrectionHomeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program; Notice of Funding AvailabilityMyVA Advisory CommitteeSolicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Genomic Medicine Program Advisory CommitteePresumption of Herbicide Exposure and Presumption of Disability During Service for Reservists Presumed Exposed to HerbicideCancellation of Meeting; Genomic Medicine Program Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting CancellationMyVA Advisory Committee; Notice of MeetingAdvisory Committee on Disability Compensation, Notice of MeetingDelegations of Authority: Office of Regulation Policy and Management (ORPM)Per Diem Paid to States for Care of Eligible Veterans in State HomesRehabilitation Research and Development Service Scientific Merit Review Board; Notice of MeetingsLoan Guaranty: Elimination of Redundant Regulations; Technical CorrectionSolicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Advisory Committee on Structural Safety of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) FacilitiesSchedule for Rating Disabilities; The Organs of Special Sense and Schedule of Ratings-EyeSolicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Advisory Committee on Prosthetics and Special-Disabilities ProgramsJoint Biomedical Laboratory Research and Development and Clinical Science Research and Development Services Scientific Merit Review Board; Amended Notice of MeetingVeterans Transportation ServiceGenomic Medicine Program Advisory Committee; Notice of MeetingAgency Information Collection (Appeal to Board of Veterans’ Appeals) Activity Under OMB ReviewGenomic Medicine Program Advisory Committee; Notice of MeetingAgency Information Collection (Appeal to Board of Veterans’ Appeals) Activity Under OMB ReviewResearch Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses; Notice of MeetingProposed Information Collection (Application for Accreditation as Service Organization Representative) Activity: Comment RequestProposed Information Collection (Awards & ROI) Activity: Comment RequestEnhanced-Use Lease of Department of Veterans Affairs Real Property for the Development of Housing Facilities in Chillicothe, OhioProposed Information Collection (Notice of Lapse-Government Life Insurance); Comment RequestExpanded Access to Non-VA Care Through the Veterans Choice Program Activities: Under OMB ReviewHealth Care for Certain Children of Vietnam Veterans and Certain Korea Veterans-Covered Birth Defects and Spina BifidaAgency Information Collection (Supplier Perception Survey) Activities Under OMB ReviewPrivacy Act of 1974Notice of Intent To Grant an Exclusive LicenseVeterans’ Advisory Committee on Rehabilitation, Notice of Charter RenewalSupplement to VA Forms 21P-534, 534a, & 534EZ Activity Under OMB Review Agency Information CollectionClaim for Disability Insurance Benefits, Government Life Insurance Activity Under OMB Review Agency Information CollectionIntent To File a Claim for Compensation and/or Pension, or Survivors Pension and/or DIC Activity Under OMB Review Agency Information CollectionApplication in Acquiring Specially Adapted Housing or Special Home Adaptation Grant) Activity Under OMB Review Agency Information CollectionProposed Information Collection (Post-Engagement) Activity: Comment RequestAgency Information Collection (Financial Status Report) Activities Under OMB ReviewGrants for Adaptive Sports Programs for Disabled Veterans and Disabled Members of the Armed ForcesAdvisory Committee on Prosthetics and Special-Disabilities Programs; Notice of MeetingPublication of Wait-Times for the Department for the Veterans Choice ProgramHealth Care for Homeless Veterans ProgramVA Claims – (Appointment of Veterans Service Organization as Claimant’s Representative and Appointment of Individual as Claimant’s Representative) -Agency Information Collection – Activity Under OMB Review(Notice of Disagreement) Activity: Proposed Information Collection – Comment RequestAgency Information Collection Educational/Vocational Counseling Application (VA Form 28-8832) Activity Under OMB ReviewAgency Information Collection (Advertising, Sales, and Enrollment Materials, and Candidate Handbooks) Activity Under OMB Review(One-VA Identification Verification Card) – Agency Information Collection – Activities Under OMB ReviewAgency Information Collection (Rehabilitation Needs Inventory) Activity Under OMB ReviewUpdating Certain Delegations of Authority in VA Medical RegulationsDriving Distance Eligibility for the Veterans Choice ProgramStandard Claims and Appeals FormsReimbursement for Caskets and Urns for Burial of Unclaimed Remains in a National CemeteryTechnical Corrections – Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) amends its regulations to remove out-of-date legal citations and add the correct authority. This rulemaking contains only nonsubstantive, technical changes.Schedule for Rating Disabilities-Mental Disorders and Definition of Psychosis for Certain VA PurposesDepartment of Veterans Affairs Acquisition Regulation: Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned and Veteran-Owned Small Business Status ProtestsSchedule for Rating Disabilities; Gynecological Conditions and Disorders of the BreastFederal Register | Proposed Information Collection (From War to Home: Improving Patient-Centered Care and Promoting Empathy for “Operation Enduring Freedom” and “Operation Iraqi Freedom” (OEF/OIF) Veterans in the Veterans Health Administration Patient Aligned Care Team Demo Lab VISN 4) Activity: Comment RequestFederal Register Vol. 80, No. 15 Friday, January 23, 2015 Veterans Affairs Proposed RulesFederal Register Vol. 80, No. 14 Thursday, January 22, 2015Federal Register Vol. 80, No. 10 Thursday, January 15, 2015Category: VA FormsForms – Veterans Benefits, Claims, Healthcare, etc.Category: VA LawVAOPGCPREC 34-97 Request for opinion concerning application of 38 U.S.C. § 3104(b)98-100 Faust v. West97-2204 Greyzck v. West97-192 Trilles v. West97-1178 Colayong v. West94-323 Gerald Hayes v. Brown93-526 Kitchens v. Brown92-325 Kevin Brown v. BrownDepartment of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General April 2015 HighlightsOIG Recommends Strengthening Teleradiology Oversight at Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock, ArkansasDelays at Memphis, Tennessee, VA Emergency Department Deemed Unavoidable Given Patient Population, Progress Noted Since Last ReviewOIG Finds Mismanagement and Distrust Impede Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, VARO Operational EffectivenessOIG Recommends Better Controls on Date Stamping Equipment and Refresher Training at Boston, Massachusetts, VA Regional OfficeOIG Makes Nine Recommendations To Improve Access to Care and Completeness of Medical Records at VA Maryland Health Care SystemPatient-Centered Community Care Contracts Cost VA $14.9 Million More Than if VA Used Non-VA Care Program To Purchase Same Health Care ServicesOIG Criticizes Office of Information and Technology Officials’ Response to Improper Access of VA Network by Contractors While Working in China and IndiaOIG’s Top Physician Tells Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee VHA Must Make Quality Health Care Its Most Important MissionAssistant Inspector General Testifies Before House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs on Mismanagement and Data Manipulation at the Philadelphia and Oakland VA Regional Offices91-771 Raymond Smith v. Brown91-542 Albert Olson v. Brown91-1903 Ternuds v. Brown90-312 Karnas v. Derwinski90-222 Murincsak v. Derwinski90-147 Gleicher v. Derwinski90-1078 Dofflemyer v. Derwinski90-1002 Hohol v. Derwinski89-114 Schafrath v. Derwinski91-542 Olson v. Brown BVA91-771 Smith v. Brown BVA90-222 Murincsak v. Derwinski BVAThe Law of Veterans’ Benefits 2008-2010: Significant Developments, Trends, and a Glimpse into the FutureAdvocacy Considerations in Board of Veterans’ Appeals Practice Vito A. Clementi Veterans Law JudgeVAOPGCPREC 1-2000 – Countable Income for Death Pension Purposes–Deduction of Expenses Paid for Veteran’s Last Illness Subsequent to Veteran’s Death, but Prior to Date of EntitlementUSCAVC Cases to assist you in your VA claim – Useful CasesVA Office of General Counsel Precedent Opinions 2009VA Office of General Counsel Precedent Opinions 2010VA Office of General Counsel Precedent Opinions 2011VA Office of General Counsel Precedent Opinions 2012VA Office of General Counsel Precedent Opinions 2014VAOGCPREC 1-2014 (3/21/2014) Provision of Primary Care for Residents in State Home DomiciliariesVA General Counsel Precedent DecisionsVA Law, VA Code, VA Manuals92-325 Brown v. Brown91-1376 Babchak v. Principi38CFR4.1 Essentials of evaluative ratingCategory: VA NewsCategory: VA WhistleblowersHearing Treatment Whistleblowers VA | Video | C-SPAN.orgCategory: Veterans2015 VETERANS CIVIC HEALTH INDEXIVMF Issues June 2015 Employment Situation of Veterans in AmericaD-Day June 6 1944HER MISSSION CONTINUES: SERVICE AND REINTEGRATION AMONGST POST-9/11 WOMEN VETERANAmerica’s WarsMemorial DayHere There Be MonstersJerry Yellin, World War II Veteran Video InterviewVA Secretary McDonald: Aging vets straining the systemVa Turns Its Back On American Military Reserves Exposed To Agent OrangeVeterans Affairs History In BriefThis Tilt-Rotor Aircraft Could Be The Future Of The US Army’s Helicopter Fleet – Business InsiderCategory: VietnamCategory: Vietnam WarBattle of Ia Drang Valley [IDV]Vietnam War Information for VA ClaimsNavy and Coast Guard Ships Associated with Service in Vietnam and Exposure to Herbicide AgentsArmy Hospitals in VietnamTestimonials
    The Power of NumbersFully Developed Claim: Success!Giving Thanks for Hadit.com websiteHadit.com is a Wealth of Information and KnowledgeThank you Hadit!!!!!!!!!!True Help and true commoroderyThank you TbirdI was Blinded by the VAKnowldge is PowerWithout YouHadit put an extra $1500 month in my pocketHelped with increasing service connected percentageGratefulHadit has been a God SendHow Hadit.com helped me with my VA Claim100% Rated "THANKS" to Hadit.comHadit.com has helped me with expert experience and advice on how to navigate in the VA worldBenefits and Family for Veterans
    • 1 reply
    • 40 views
  3. Tbird added an answer to a question BVA APPEALS DECISION FOR DOCKET NO. 15-17117 I can"t seem to find it can someone help me it"S a financial hardship case   

    Below is the text and link I think you are looking for. Citation Nr: 1517117 Decision Date: 04/21/15 Archive Date: 04/24/15 DOCKET NO. 05-08 819 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Winston-Salem, North Carolina THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to an earlier effective date than May 5, 2010 for the assignment of a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU). 2. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 40 percent for service-connected disc space narrowing L4-L5 and wedging of T12-L1 (hereinafter low back disability). REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD C. Boyd, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from March 1977 to November 1986. These matters come before the Board of Veteran's Appeals (Board) from a January 2005 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Winston-Salem, North Carolina in which the RO denied entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for the Veteran's spine disability. Thereafter, the Veteran underwent a VA examination in November 2005 and in a supplemental statement of the case dated in December 2005, the rating for the Veteran's spine disability was increased to 40 percent. The Veteran appealed. In a June 2012 remand of that claim, the Board found that entitlement to a TDIU had been raised by the record. Entitlement to a TDIU was granted in an August 2014 statement of the case with an effective of May 5, 2010. The Veteran disagrees with the denial of a TDIU prior to May 5, 2010. A hearing was held before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in June 2007. A transcript of the proceeding is associated with the claims file. The issue of entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 40 percent for a service-connected low back disability is addressed in the remand portion of this decision and is REMANDED to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran has not worked since May 2003 when he left his job as a corrections officer on account of his back disability which kept him from performing the physical requirements of the job. 2. The Veteran has been receiving social security disability benefits on account of his back disability and depression since April 2004. 3. The record prior to May 5, 2010, when the Veteran was granted service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and met the schedular criteria for entitlement to a TDIU, does not indicate the Veteran was unemployable due solely to the disabilities that were service-connected at that time, to include a low back disability, radiculopathy of the left lower extremity, residuals of a left ankle injury, tinnitus and hearing loss. CONCLUSION OF LAW Prior to May 5, 2010 the criteria necessary to establish entitlement to a TDIU were not met. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1155, 5103A, 5107 (West 2002 & Supp. 2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.655, 4.16 (2014). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION I. VA's Duty to Notify and Assist The Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA), Pub. L. No. 106-475, 114 Stat. 2096 (Nov. 9, 2000) (codified at 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5106, 5107, and 5126) includes enhanced duties to notify and assist claimants for VA benefits. VA regulations implementing the VCAA were codified as amended at 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), 3.159, and 3.326(a). Upon receipt of a complete or substantially complete application for benefits, VA is required to notify the claimant and his representative of any information, and any medical or lay evidence, that is necessary to substantiate the claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(b); Quartuccio v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 183 (2002). The VCAA notice must inform the claimant of any information and evidence not of record (1) that is necessary to substantiate the claim; (2) that VA will seek to provide; and (3) that the claimant is expected to provide. VCAA notice should be provided to a claimant before the initial unfavorable agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on a claim. Pelegrini v. Principi, 18 Vet. App. 112 (2004). In June 2012, the Board found that the issue of entitlement to a TDIU had been raised by the record as part of the Veteran's increased rating claims. Thereafter, in October 2012, the RO sent the Veteran a notice letter indicating what was required to demonstrate entitlement to a TDIU and encouraging the Veteran to file a VA Form 21-8940, Veterans Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability. In a July 2014 supplemental statement of the case, the RO explained the requirements for entitlement to a TDIU and granted a TDIU as of the date the Veteran met the schedular criteria for entitlement on May 5, 2010. The record also reflects that the RO obtained the Veteran's VA treatment records and Social Security Administration (SSA) disability records. There is no indication that records dated prior to May 5, 2010 that would be relevant to the Veteran's TDIU claim exist that have not yet been associated with the electronic claims file. The Veteran was provided the opportunity to meaningfully participate in the development of his claim. Washington v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 191 (2007). Based on the foregoing, the Board concludes that no further assistance to the Veteran with the development of the evidence is required. II. Entitlement to a TDIU prior to May 5, 2010 It is the established policy of the VA that all veterans who are unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation by reason of service-connected disabilities shall be rated totally disabled. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b). A total disability will be considered to exist when there is present any impairment of mind or body which is sufficient to render it impossible for the average person to follow a substantially gainful occupation. Consideration may be given to the veteran's level of education, special training, and previous work experience in arriving at a conclusion, but not to his or her age or to the impairment caused by nonservice-connected disabilities. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.341, 4.16, 4.19. Total disability ratings for compensation may be assigned, where the schedular rating is less than total, when the disabled person is, in the judgment of the rating agency, unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected disabilities provided that if there is only one such disability, this disability shall be ratable at 60 percent or more, and that, if there are two or more such disabilities, there shall be at least one disability ratable at 40 percent or more, and sufficient additional disability to bring the combined rating to 70 percent or more. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). Prior to May 5, 2010, service connection was in effect for traumatic arthritis of the spine rated as 40 percent disabling from November 5, 2005, for residuals, left ankle injury rated as 20 percent disabling from March 17, 2004, for tinnitus rated as 10 percent disabling from October 7, 2004, for radiculopathy of the left lower extremity rated as 10 percent disabling from March 17, 2004 and for hearing loss which was assigned a noncompensable rating from October 7, 2004. The Veteran's combined disability rating was 60 percent. Therefore, prior to May 5, 2010, the minimum percentage requirements for a TDIU rating set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a) were not met. Given these facts, prior to May 5, 2010, the date on which the Veteran met the schedular requirements for entitlement, TDIU could only be granted on an extraschedular basis pursuant to the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b). If the evidence prior to May 5, 2010 reflects that the Veteran is unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation by reason of service-connected disabilities, his claim could be referred to the Director of the VA Compensation and Pension Service for consideration of whether a TDIU may be awarded on an extra-schedular basis. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b). The Board cannot award a TDIU on this basis in the first instance. The Veteran initially applied for a TDIU in April 2004. In August 2004, the RO denied entitlement to a TDIU because it had not been shown that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities, to include residuals of a left ankle injury rated as noncompensable and traumatic arthritis of the back rated as 20 percent disabling, rendered him unemployable. The RO referenced a statement from the Veteran's former employer that he was not working due to "unavailability." The Veteran filed for social security disability in July 2003, claiming an onset date of May 10, 2003. At a hearing in October 2005, the date of alleged onset was changed to April 29, 2004. In an October 2005 correspondence in support of the Veteran's application, it was noted that the Veteran worked as a corrections officer until April 2003 when he stopped working because of a back problem. In January 2006, the SSA determined that degenerative disc disease, arthritis and depression were medically determinable "severe" impairments. It was found that the Veteran was released from work in April 2003 due to his back problems and that in July 2003, it was noted the Veteran was exhibiting depressive symptoms. The SSA determined in its decision that the Veteran retained the residual functional capacity to lift and carry up to 10 pounds and sit six hours in an eight-hour workday with occasional standing and walking. Disability benefits were granted effective from April 29, 2004 based on an exertional capacity for sedentary work, and the claimant's age, education, and work experience. The Veteran was found to be disabled as directed by SSA medical vocational rule 201.14. The evidence shows that at the time of the SSA determination the Veteran was capable of sedentary employment and therefore, entitlement to a TDIU had not been demonstrated at that time. In November 2005, the Veteran underwent a VA examination of his back and ankle. It was indicated that both medical problems affected his ability to perform his previous occupation as a correction officer because he was not able to perform the physical activities required for the job. In November 2008, the Veteran underwent a VA examination of the stomach. The examiner noted that the Veteran was collecting social security disability and that he walked with a cane due to "other medical problems." It was indicated that if his only problem were stomach upset and distress, that would not prevent him from working in his previous job as a corrections officer. The record suggests that the Veteran's unemployability is caused by a combination of his service-connected disabilities, to include a psychiatric disability that was not service-connected prior to May 5, 2010. When considering eligibility for a TDIU, it is not appropriate to consider non-service-connected disabilities and, as such, prior to May 5, 2010, the Veteran's psychiatric disorder could not be considered as evidence that might support the grant of TDIU or evidence that support referral for extraschedular consideration of TDIU. A review of the records does reflect that the Veteran stopped working in his former occupation in 2003 on account of a service-connected back disability. There is also evidence that the Veteran's back and ankle disabilities affect his ability to be employed in jobs that are physically demanding and that he could no longer work in his chosen field as a corrections officer. However, the evidence does not support a finding that the Veteran would be unable to maintain any substantially gainful employment solely on account of his back disability, left ankle disability, radiculopathy, tinnitus and hearing loss, the disabilities for which he had been granted service-connected prior to May 5, 2010. The Veteran's social security records indicate the Veteran did have the capacity for sedentary work and since depression could not be considered as one of the disabilities precluding the Veteran from maintaining employment prior to May 5, 2010, the Board finds that May 5, 2010 is the correct effective date for TDIU and that referral for extraschedular consideration is not warranted. ORDER Entitlement to a TDIU prior to May 5, 2010 is denied. REMAND Reason for Remand: To schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected low back disability. The Veteran originally sought a rating in excess of 20 percent for his service-connected low back disability in August 2003. Initially, this claim was denied in an August 2004 rating decision and subsequent statement of the case dated in January 2005. Thereafter, the Veteran underwent a VA examination in November 2005 and in a supplemental statement of the case dated in December 2005, the rating for the Veteran's low back disability was increased to 40 percent. The Veteran appealed. In May 2008, the Board remanded the claim to provide the Veteran proper notice regarding the rating criteria for spinal disabilities. In November 2010, the Board remanded the claim again for another VA examination of the Veteran's spine and to ensure the Veteran was provided with proper notice regarding the criteria for Intervertebral Disc Syndrome (IVDS). The Veteran underwent an examination in January 2011. Another examination was performed on the Veteran's spine in December 2011, but, this examination report was not considered by the RO in a supplemental statement of the case. When the Board reviewed the claim again in June 2012, the Veteran had still not been provided with proper notice, to include the rating criteria for IVDS, in a notice letter, the statement of the case or the supplemental statement in the case. The claim was remanded again to provide this notification. In October 2012, the RO sent the Veteran a notification letter than included the IVDS criteria. In addition, the July 2014 supplemental statement of the case also included the IVDS criteria. The claim is again before the Board. Disabilities of the spine are rated under the General Rating Formula for Diseases and Injuries of the Spine (hereinafter: General Rating Formula) for Diagnostic Codes (DCs) 5235 to 5243, unless 5243 is evaluated under the Formula for Rating Intervertebral Disc Syndrome Based on Incapacitating Episodes (hereinafter: IVDS Formula). With respect to the thoracolumbar spine, under the General Rating Formula, with or without symptoms such as pain (whether or not it radiates), stiffness, or aching in the area of the spine affected by residuals of injury or disease, a 40 percent rating is contemplated when forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine is 30 degrees or less; or, favorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine. A 50 percent rating is warranted when there is unfavorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine. A 100 percent rating is warranted when there is unfavorable ankylosis of the entire spine. Unfavorable ankylosis is a condition in which the entire thoracolumbar spine or the entire spine is fixed in flexion or extension. Fixation of a spinal segment in neutral position (zero degrees) always represents favorable ankylosis. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, General Rating Formula, Note (5) (2013). Under the IVDS Formula, an evaluation of 40 percent is granted for incapacitating episodes of IVDS having a total duration of at least 4 weeks but less than 6 weeks during the past 12 months. A higher evaluation of 60 percent is not warranted unless there are incapacitating episodes of intervertebral disc syndrome having a total duration of at least 6 weeks during the past 12 months. The most recent examinations of record dated in January and December 2011 do not support entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 40 percent and entitlement to a higher rating is not factually ascertainable in the Veteran's treatment records. Notably, the range of motion measurements for the thoracolumbar spine as measured in January 2011 and December 2011 differ greatly. In claims for an increased rating, the current level of disability is most important. Where the evidence of record does not reflect the current state of the Veteran's disability, a VA examination must be conducted. Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589 (1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.327(a). Here, the most recent spine examinations took place around four years ago and range of motion results differed greatly between those examinations. Although age of an examination is not, in itself, an automatic reason for remand, a current examination is necessary in determining the overall disability picture. Based on the foregoing, the Board will remand the claim to retrieve any outstanding treatment records and to schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the severity of his service-connected low back disability. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Associate all outstanding VA treatment records with the claims file. 2. Ask the Veteran to provide authorization for release of any private treatment records pertaining to his low back disability that are not already in the claims file. Request any records properly identified by the Veteran. 3. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with an appropriate specialist to assess the current nature and severity of his service-connected low back disability. The electronic claims file should be made available for review and the examination report should reflect that such review occurred. The examiner should perform range of motion testing administered with a goniometer. Along with actual measurement of range of motion, the examiner should indicate whether and the extent to which such motion is affected by pain, weakness, fatigue, lack of endurance, incoordination or other symptoms resulting in additional functional loss. The examiner should note the presence of favorable ankylosis, unfavorable ankylosis and/or incapacitating episodes. The examiner should specifically indicate the presence of any other associated objective neurologic abnormalities, to include bowel or bladder impairment. All objective and subjective symptoms should be reported in detail. 4. When the development requested has been completed, the case should be reviewed by the RO on the basis of additional evidence. If the benefit sought is not granted to the fullest extent, the Veteran and his representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) and be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board for further review. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West 2014). ______________________________________________ KATHLEEN K. GALLAGHER Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Department of Veterans Affairs
    • 0
  4. Tbird added an answer to a question BVA APPEALS DECISION FOR DOCKET NO. 15-17117 I can"t seem to find it can someone help me it"S a financial hardship case   

    roland it's better to use just a username to display instead of your email address let me know here if you would like me to change it
    • 0
  5. Tbird added an answer to a question VA claims process lightning fast now?   

    it ain't over till it's over - sometimes it bounces back and forth - but you are closer
    • 0
  6. Tbird added an answer to a question VA Determined I'm incompetent   

    If you can manage your own money, I would fight it. YOu don't have much time to fight it it will say in the letter. As far as a family caregiver you may be able to use this but only if you are a post 9/11 veteran.
    If you were to be assigned a fiduciary I'm not sure that would have any bearing on the caregiver program if you were eligible for it. 
    • 0
  7. Tbird added an answer to a question CAN YOU RECORD EXAMINATIONS?   

    Below is how they deal with recording devices and it seems we could argue with similar logic that there is no constitutional, statutory, or regulatory bar to use of recording devices.
     
    • 0
  8. Tbird added an answer to a question CAN YOU RECORD EXAMINATIONS?   

    #10 below addresses the use of recording devices.
    DATE: 02-13-91 CITATION: VAOPGCPREC 04-91  Vet. Aff. Op. Gen. Couns. Prec. 04-91
    TEXT: Failure to Submit to Medical Examination–Insistence on the Presence of an Attorney and Use of a Recording Device
    QUESTION PRESENTED: Has a veteran failed to report for a scheduled examination for purposes of 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 if he or she appears but refuses to be examined unless accompanied by a private attorney and allowed to record the evaluation?
    COMMENTS:
    This is in response to your request for an opinion concerning the possible "right" of Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) beneficiaries to be accompanied by an attorney during scheduled VA medical examinations.  The veteran appeared for a scheduled psychiatric examination but refused to be examined unless the veteran's attorney was present and the veteran was permitted to use a tape recorder during the evaluation.  Section 3.329 of title 38, Code of Federal Regulations, provides that every person applying for or in receipt of compensation or pension shall submit to examinations when required by VA under proper authority.  Section 3.655 of that title provides for discontinuance of benefits when a veteran fails "without adequate reason" to report for examination. Determination of the facts surrounding a claimant's failure to report is a factual matter which rests with VA adjudication and appellate personnel.  See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.100 and 19.111.  This opinion addresses the legal issue of whether denial of assistance of counsel and use of a recording device in connection with a VA-required examination constitutes adequate reason for failure to submit to examination for purposes of section 3.655.A "right to counsel" in administrative proceedings does not exist unless it can be found in some constitutional clause, statutory measure, or regulation.  Barker v. Hardway, 283 F.Supp. 228 (S.D.W.Va.), aff'd, 399 F.2d 638 (4th Cir.1968), cert.  denied, 394 U.S. 905 (1969);  Suess v. Pugh, 245 F.Supp. 661 (N.D.W.Va.1965) (proceeding before Professional Standards Board of Veterans Administration).  Turning first to the United States Constitution, we note that the sixth amendment provides for the assistance of counsel " i n all criminal prosecutions."  It has no bearing on the question of assistance of counsel in civil matters before administrative agencies.  Hannah v. Larche, 363 U.S. 420 (1960); Smith v. United States, 250 F.Supp. 803 (D.N.J.1966), appeal dismissed, 377 F.2d 739 (3d Cir.1967);Suess, 245 F.Supp. at 665.  The fifth amendment is less specific than the sixth and contains a very powerful guarantee, requiring  that one not be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."  U.S. Const. amendment V.  However, in interpreting that clause, the courts have been reluctant to find that "due process" includes a right to representation by counsel in administrative activities of an investigatory or preliminary nature.  E.g., In Re Groban, 352 U.S. 330, 335 (1957) (no right to assistance of counsel in testifying at an investigatory proceeding); Bowles v. Baer, 142 F.2d 787, 789 (7th Cir.1944) (investigations held in private, without representation by counsel-- held no provision of the Constitution required public hearing); see also Hannah, 363 U.S. at 440-51 (no right to cross-examine witnesses before commission performing investigative function).  See generally Torras v. Stradley, 103 F.Supp. 737, 739 (N.D.Ga.1951) (noting cases recognizing distinction between fact-finding functions and those involving determination of legal rights).In applying this case law to the situation under consideration, we note that medical examinations conducted by VA are investigative in nature. Within VA, there is a clear delineation between the role of the Veterans Health Services and Research Administration (VHS & RA) and that of the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA).  Compare the Department of Veterans Affairs Act, Pub.L. No. 100-527, § 7, 102 Stat. 2635, 2640 (1988), with 38 U.S.C. § 4101(a).  As set out in 38 C.F.R. ss 2.67 and 3.100(a), authority is delegated to VBA personnel to make findings and decisions as to entitlement of claimants to monetary benefits under laws administered by VA.  Thus, even though medical examinations conducted by VHS & RA provide important information relevant to claims for benefits, the  examinations are not conducted by the same individuals who
    participate in benefit decisions, and the reports of those examinations represent only one piece of information which will be considered by adjudication personnel in determining eligibility for benefits.  Given the nature of the examination function, there is thus, in our view, no constitutional right to the presence of an attorney at a VA medical examination.With regard to pertinent statutory provisions, assistance of counsel for persons appearing before administrative agencies is addressed in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in the first two sentences of 5 U.S.C. § 555(b).  The first sentence provides that " a person compelled to appear in person before an agency or representative thereof is entitled to be accompanied, represented, and advised by counsel or, if permitted by the agency, by other qualified representative."  The second sentence adds that " a party is entitled to appear in person or by or with counsel or other duly qualified representative in an agency proceeding."  The legislative history of the predecessor to this provision indicates that the second sentence was intended to supplement the first sentence by providing a rule to govern situations where appearance of an individual is not compelled.
    92 Cong.Rec. 2156 (1946) (statement of Senator McCarran).  Since the veteran in this case was required to appear for examination at the risk of termination of benefits, we believe that only the first sentence of section 555(b) is for consideration here.The predecessor to section 555 was described in congressional committee reports as prescribing "the rights of private parties in a number of miscellaneous respects which may be incidental to rulemaking, adjudication, or the exercise of any other agency authority."  H.R.Rep. No. 1980, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. 18, reprinted in 1946 U.S.Code Cong.Service 1195, 1206;  S.Rep. No. 752, 79th Cong., 1st Sess. 8 (1945).  The reference to "any other agency authority" suggests a broad application of the section.  Further, a section-by-section analysis in the House report on the measure stated broadly " t he section is a statement of statutory and mandatory right of interested persons to appear themselves or through or with counsel before any agency in connection with any function, matter, or process whether formal, informal, public, or private." H.R.Rep. No. 1980, supra, at 31.Given that Congress intended the provision to apply to a broad range of agency functions, the question remains as to whether Congress intended that any limitations apply with respect to the scope of representation activities. This issue was addressed in House floor debate on the measure by Congressman Walter of the Committee on the Judiciary, who stated " t he representation of counsel contemplated by the bill means full representation as the term is understood in the courts of law." 92 Cong.Rec. 5652 (1946).  Thus, it appears that the scope of
    representation was intended to be consistent with that recognized in judicial proceedings.  A review of analogous situations in judicial proceedings reveals that medical examinations in both adversarial and nonadversarial settings are almost uniformly conducted without the presence of attorneys.  For example, parties do not have the right, under discovery rules, to have an attorney present during mental or physical examinations conducted by physicians pursuant to Rule 35(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. E.g., Wheat v. Biesecker, 125 F.R.D. 479 (N.D.Ind.1989) (by attending the examination the attorney might have to choose between participating at trial as a litigator of as a witness);  Cline v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 118 F.R.D. 588 (S.D.W.Va.1988) (nature of psychological examination  particularly dictates against allowing the attorney to be present).Courts considering the issue of assistance of counsel in administrative proceedings have frequently ignored the possible applicability of the APA. Wasson v. Trowbridge, 382 F.2d 807, 812 (2d Cir.1967) (APA not mentioned in discussion of right of military academy cadet to counsel during expulsion hearing); Schawartzberg v. United States Board of Parole, 399 F.2d 297 (10th Cir.1968) (upheld regulation excluding counsel from parole hearings without mentioning APA).  In F.C.C. v. Schreiber, 329 F.2d 517 (9th Cir.1964), modified on other grounds, 381 U.S. 279   (1965), the Ninth Circuit held that application of the "right to counsel" as provided in the APA varies with the circumstances of the case.  In its turn, the Supreme Court noted, in F.C.C. v. Schreiber, 381 U.S. 279, 290 (1965), that administrative agencies should be free to fashion their own procedures and pursue methods of inquiry capable of permitting them to discharge their "multitudinous duties."Significantly, it has been held that, under the social security statutes, a claimant for social security benefits may not insist on the presence of an attorney during disability examinations conducted by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.  Neumerski v. Califano, 513 F.Supp. 1011
    (E.D.Pa.1981).  The reasoning in Neumerski is illuminating.  The court rejected the plaintiff's argument that the presence of counsel was justified because the proceedings had been given an adversarial taint by the agency's request for further examination.  Consistent with the legislative history of the APA the court pointed out that attorneys have no right to be present at medical or psychological examinations in truly adversarial civil litigation.  513 F.Supp. at 1016.  Quoting from Brandenberg v. El Al Airlines, 79 F.R.D. 543, 546 (S.D.N.Y.1978), which labeled as "frivolous" the claim that an attorney should be present at such an examination, the court indicated that " t his is especially true in psychological examinations which depend on 'unimpeded one- on-one communication between doctor and patient.' "  513 F.Supp. at 1017.  In addition to the concern that the presence of an attorney would undermine the communication process of an examination, courts have also recognized that there is very little an attorney can contribute in certain settings.  Cf. Cruz v. Skelton, 543 F.2d 86, 96 (5th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 433 U.S. 911 (1977) (parole board hearing does "not present a forum in which the special analytical, research or forensic skills of the lawyer are necessary, nor even likely to prove particularly helpful").  In light of these considerations, we cannot conclude that the APA provides a right to be represented by counsel at the examination itself.Turning to relevant VA statutes and regulations, we note that there is no provision in title 38, United States Code, or in VA regulations, specifically granting a claimant the right to have his or her attorney, or other representative, present during a medical evaluation.  Further, the involvement of claimants' representatives in VA proceedings is clearly not without limits. For example, while the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(e) state that claimants "are entitled to representation of their choice at every stage in the prosecution of a claim," this provision is specifically made subject to the general provisions governing representation by attorneys and other representatives of claimants and beneficiaries in the "preparation, presentation, and prosecution" of matters affecting veterans' benefits.  See 38 U.S.C. § 3404(a);  38 C.F.R. § 14.626, et seq.  See also 38
    U.S.C. § 4005(a) (representation rights to be accorded in  administrative appeals pursuant to VA regulations);  38 C.F.R. § 19.150 (full right to representation by "authorized" individuals in all stages of an appeal).  Even assuming that a regularly scheduled medical examination represents a "stage in the prosecution of a claim" for purposes of section 3.103(e), the  scope of representation must be considered in light of the generally recognized limitations on the role of attorneys in judicial and administrative proceedings.  Such limitations, as discussed above, generally preclude the presence of attorneys at medical examinations, particularly those of a psychiatric nature. Thus, the provisions of titles 38 of the United States Code and the Code of Federal Regulations cannot be read to grant attorneys authority to participate in such activities. In view of the foregoing, we conclude that a veteran does not have a right to be accompanied by counsel at a scheduled VA examination and cannot justifiably refuse to submit to examination on the basis of denial of counsel.Similarly, there is no constitutional, statutory, or regulatory requirement that would allow beneficiaries to use recording devices during VA medical examinations.  Again, it must  be noted that the examinations at issue are investigative and preliminary in nature.  Further, while case law on the subject is not extensive, it supports the conclusion that one has no "right" to record such activities.  See, e.g., Baer, 142 F.2d at 788-89  (no constitutional infirmity where court reporter ordered to leave investigative-hearing room); In Re Neil, 209 F.Supp. 76, 77  (S.D.W.Va.1962) (APA does not extend to any party the right to bring a stenographer to report the proceedings at an agency hearing); Torras, 103 F.Supp. at 740 (witness in investigative proceeding did not have right under the APA to the presence of a personal stenographer).  As discussed above with respect to the presence of an attorney, use of a recording device would threaten to impede free communication between the examinee and the examining physician.  VA regulations do not authorize the use of recording devices at medical examinations, and we find that their use is not otherwise required by law.  Thus, denial of the use of such a device would not be an adequate reason to refuse to submit to examination.HELD:
    Neither the Constitution, the Administrative Procedure Act, nor VA statutes and regulations provide a right to counsel at medical examinations scheduled by VA for evaluation of beneficiaries, including psychiatric evaluation.  As, under the relevant constitutional, statutory, and regulatory provisions, there is no "right" to be accompanied by an attorney to this type of agency activity, refusal to participate unless accompanied by an attorney may be considered a failure to report for purposes of VA regulations at 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 providing for discontinuance of benefits for failure to report for examination.  Similarly, a beneficiary may not insist on using a recording device at a VA medical examination, and refusal to participate due to absence of such a device may be considered a failure to report for purposes of VA regulations governing termination of benefits.
    VETERANS ADMINISTRATION GENERAL COUNSEL
    Vet. Aff. Op. Gen. Couns. Prec. 04-91
    PREC-04-91.pdf
    • 0
  9. Tbird added a question in (VA Claims Research) Veterans Affairs Claims and Benefits Research   

    Recording Devices and Attorneys at Compensation and Pension Exams
    #10 below addresses the use of recording devices.
    DATE: 02-13-91 CITATION: VAOPGCPREC 04-91  Vet. Aff. Op. Gen. Couns. Prec. 04-91
    TEXT: Failure to Submit to Medical Examination–Insistence on the Presence of an Attorney and Use of a Recording Device
    QUESTION PRESENTED: Has a veteran failed to report for a scheduled examination for purposes of 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 if he or she appears but refuses to be examined unless accompanied by a private attorney and allowed to record the evaluation?
    COMMENTS:
    This is in response to your request for an opinion concerning the possible "right" of Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) beneficiaries to be accompanied by an attorney during scheduled VA medical examinations.  The veteran appeared for a scheduled psychiatric examination but refused to be examined unless the veteran's attorney was present and the veteran was permitted to use a tape recorder during the evaluation.  Section 3.329 of title 38, Code of Federal Regulations, provides that every person applying for or in receipt of compensation or pension shall submit to examinations when required by VA under proper authority.  Section 3.655 of that title provides for discontinuance of benefits when a veteran fails "without adequate reason" to report for examination. Determination of the facts surrounding a claimant's failure to report is a factual matter which rests with VA adjudication and appellate personnel.  See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.100 and 19.111.  This opinion addresses the legal issue of whether denial of assistance of counsel and use of a recording device in connection with a VA-required examination constitutes adequate reason for failure to submit to examination for purposes of section 3.655.A "right to counsel" in administrative proceedings does not exist unless it can be found in some constitutional clause, statutory measure, or regulation.  Barker v. Hardway, 283 F.Supp. 228 (S.D.W.Va.), aff'd, 399 F.2d 638 (4th Cir.1968), cert.  denied, 394 U.S. 905 (1969);  Suess v. Pugh, 245 F.Supp. 661 (N.D.W.Va.1965) (proceeding before Professional Standards Board of Veterans Administration).  Turning first to the United States Constitution, we note that the sixth amendment provides for the assistance of counsel " i n all criminal prosecutions."  It has no bearing on the question of assistance of counsel in civil matters before administrative agencies.  Hannah v. Larche, 363 U.S. 420 (1960); Smith v. United States, 250 F.Supp. 803 (D.N.J.1966), appeal dismissed, 377 F.2d 739 (3d Cir.1967);Suess, 245 F.Supp. at 665.  The fifth amendment is less specific than the sixth and contains a very powerful guarantee, requiring  that one not be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."  U.S. Const. amendment V.  However, in interpreting that clause, the courts have been reluctant to find that "due process" includes a right to representation by counsel in administrative activities of an investigatory or preliminary nature.  E.g., In Re Groban, 352 U.S. 330, 335 (1957) (no right to assistance of counsel in testifying at an investigatory proceeding); Bowles v. Baer, 142 F.2d 787, 789 (7th Cir.1944) (investigations held in private, without representation by counsel-- held no provision of the Constitution required public hearing); see also Hannah, 363 U.S. at 440-51 (no right to cross-examine witnesses before commission performing investigative function).  See generally Torras v. Stradley, 103 F.Supp. 737, 739 (N.D.Ga.1951) (noting cases recognizing distinction between fact-finding functions and those involving determination of legal rights).In applying this case law to the situation under consideration, we note that medical examinations conducted by VA are investigative in nature. Within VA, there is a clear delineation between the role of the Veterans Health Services and Research Administration (VHS & RA) and that of the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA).  Compare the Department of Veterans Affairs Act, Pub.L. No. 100-527, § 7, 102 Stat. 2635, 2640 (1988), with 38 U.S.C. § 4101(a).  As set out in 38 C.F.R. ss 2.67 and 3.100(a), authority is delegated to VBA personnel to make findings and decisions as to entitlement of claimants to monetary benefits under laws administered by VA.  Thus, even though medical examinations conducted by VHS & RA provide important information relevant to claims for benefits, the  examinations are not conducted by the same individuals who
    participate in benefit decisions, and the reports of those examinations represent only one piece of information which will be considered by adjudication personnel in determining eligibility for benefits.  Given the nature of the examination function, there is thus, in our view, no constitutional right to the presence of an attorney at a VA medical examination.With regard to pertinent statutory provisions, assistance of counsel for persons appearing before administrative agencies is addressed in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in the first two sentences of 5 U.S.C. § 555(b).  The first sentence provides that " a person compelled to appear in person before an agency or representative thereof is entitled to be accompanied, represented, and advised by counsel or, if permitted by the agency, by other qualified representative."  The second sentence adds that " a party is entitled to appear in person or by or with counsel or other duly qualified representative in an agency proceeding."  The legislative history of the predecessor to this provision indicates that the second sentence was intended to supplement the first sentence by providing a rule to govern situations where appearance of an individual is not compelled.
    92 Cong.Rec. 2156 (1946) (statement of Senator McCarran).  Since the veteran in this case was required to appear for examination at the risk of termination of benefits, we believe that only the first sentence of section 555(b) is for consideration here.The predecessor to section 555 was described in congressional committee reports as prescribing "the rights of private parties in a number of miscellaneous respects which may be incidental to rulemaking, adjudication, or the exercise of any other agency authority."  H.R.Rep. No. 1980, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. 18, reprinted in 1946 U.S.Code Cong.Service 1195, 1206;  S.Rep. No. 752, 79th Cong., 1st Sess. 8 (1945).  The reference to "any other agency authority" suggests a broad application of the section.  Further, a section-by-section analysis in the House report on the measure stated broadly " t he section is a statement of statutory and mandatory right of interested persons to appear themselves or through or with counsel before any agency in connection with any function, matter, or process whether formal, informal, public, or private." H.R.Rep. No. 1980, supra, at 31.Given that Congress intended the provision to apply to a broad range of agency functions, the question remains as to whether Congress intended that any limitations apply with respect to the scope of representation activities. This issue was addressed in House floor debate on the measure by Congressman Walter of the Committee on the Judiciary, who stated " t he representation of counsel contemplated by the bill means full representation as the term is understood in the courts of law." 92 Cong.Rec. 5652 (1946).  Thus, it appears that the scope of
    representation was intended to be consistent with that recognized in judicial proceedings.  A review of analogous situations in judicial proceedings reveals that medical examinations in both adversarial and nonadversarial settings are almost uniformly conducted without the presence of attorneys.  For example, parties do not have the right, under discovery rules, to have an attorney present during mental or physical examinations conducted by physicians pursuant to Rule 35(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. E.g., Wheat v. Biesecker, 125 F.R.D. 479 (N.D.Ind.1989) (by attending the examination the attorney might have to choose between participating at trial as a litigator of as a witness);  Cline v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 118 F.R.D. 588 (S.D.W.Va.1988) (nature of psychological examination  particularly dictates against allowing the attorney to be present).Courts considering the issue of assistance of counsel in administrative proceedings have frequently ignored the possible applicability of the APA. Wasson v. Trowbridge, 382 F.2d 807, 812 (2d Cir.1967) (APA not mentioned in discussion of right of military academy cadet to counsel during expulsion hearing); Schawartzberg v. United States Board of Parole, 399 F.2d 297 (10th Cir.1968) (upheld regulation excluding counsel from parole hearings without mentioning APA).  In F.C.C. v. Schreiber, 329 F.2d 517 (9th Cir.1964), modified on other grounds, 381 U.S. 279   (1965), the Ninth Circuit held that application of the "right to counsel" as provided in the APA varies with the circumstances of the case.  In its turn, the Supreme Court noted, in F.C.C. v. Schreiber, 381 U.S. 279, 290 (1965), that administrative agencies should be free to fashion their own procedures and pursue methods of inquiry capable of permitting them to discharge their "multitudinous duties."Significantly, it has been held that, under the social security statutes, a claimant for social security benefits may not insist on the presence of an attorney during disability examinations conducted by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.  Neumerski v. Califano, 513 F.Supp. 1011
    (E.D.Pa.1981).  The reasoning in Neumerski is illuminating.  The court rejected the plaintiff's argument that the presence of counsel was justified because the proceedings had been given an adversarial taint by the agency's request for further examination.  Consistent with the legislative history of the APA the court pointed out that attorneys have no right to be present at medical or psychological examinations in truly adversarial civil litigation.  513 F.Supp. at 1016.  Quoting from Brandenberg v. El Al Airlines, 79 F.R.D. 543, 546 (S.D.N.Y.1978), which labeled as "frivolous" the claim that an attorney should be present at such an examination, the court indicated that " t his is especially true in psychological examinations which depend on 'unimpeded one- on-one communication between doctor and patient.' "  513 F.Supp. at 1017.  In addition to the concern that the presence of an attorney would undermine the communication process of an examination, courts have also recognized that there is very little an attorney can contribute in certain settings.  Cf. Cruz v. Skelton, 543 F.2d 86, 96 (5th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 433 U.S. 911 (1977) (parole board hearing does "not present a forum in which the special analytical, research or forensic skills of the lawyer are necessary, nor even likely to prove particularly helpful").  In light of these considerations, we cannot conclude that the APA provides a right to be represented by counsel at the examination itself.Turning to relevant VA statutes and regulations, we note that there is no provision in title 38, United States Code, or in VA regulations, specifically granting a claimant the right to have his or her attorney, or other representative, present during a medical evaluation.  Further, the involvement of claimants' representatives in VA proceedings is clearly not without limits. For example, while the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(e) state that claimants "are entitled to representation of their choice at every stage in the prosecution of a claim," this provision is specifically made subject to the general provisions governing representation by attorneys and other representatives of claimants and beneficiaries in the "preparation, presentation, and prosecution" of matters affecting veterans' benefits.  See 38 U.S.C. § 3404(a);  38 C.F.R. § 14.626, et seq.  See also 38
    U.S.C. § 4005(a) (representation rights to be accorded in  administrative appeals pursuant to VA regulations);  38 C.F.R. § 19.150 (full right to representation by "authorized" individuals in all stages of an appeal).  Even assuming that a regularly scheduled medical examination represents a "stage in the prosecution of a claim" for purposes of section 3.103(e), the  scope of representation must be considered in light of the generally recognized limitations on the role of attorneys in judicial and administrative proceedings.  Such limitations, as discussed above, generally preclude the presence of attorneys at medical examinations, particularly those of a psychiatric nature. Thus, the provisions of titles 38 of the United States Code and the Code of Federal Regulations cannot be read to grant attorneys authority to participate in such activities. In view of the foregoing, we conclude that a veteran does not have a right to be accompanied by counsel at a scheduled VA examination and cannot justifiably refuse to submit to examination on the basis of denial of counsel.Similarly, there is no constitutional, statutory, or regulatory requirement that would allow beneficiaries to use recording devices during VA medical examinations.  Again, it must  be noted that the examinations at issue are investigative and preliminary in nature.  Further, while case law on the subject is not extensive, it supports the conclusion that one has no "right" to record such activities.  See, e.g., Baer, 142 F.2d at 788-89  (no constitutional infirmity where court reporter ordered to leave investigative-hearing room); In Re Neil, 209 F.Supp. 76, 77  (S.D.W.Va.1962) (APA does not extend to any party the right to bring a stenographer to report the proceedings at an agency hearing); Torras, 103 F.Supp. at 740 (witness in investigative proceeding did not have right under the APA to the presence of a personal stenographer).  As discussed above with respect to the presence of an attorney, use of a recording device would threaten to impede free communication between the examinee and the examining physician.  VA regulations do not authorize the use of recording devices at medical examinations, and we find that their use is not otherwise required by law.  Thus, denial of the use of such a device would not be an adequate reason to refuse to submit to examination.HELD:
    Neither the Constitution, the Administrative Procedure Act, nor VA statutes and regulations provide a right to counsel at medical examinations scheduled by VA for evaluation of beneficiaries, including psychiatric evaluation.  As, under the relevant constitutional, statutory, and regulatory provisions, there is no "right" to be accompanied by an attorney to this type of agency activity, refusal to participate unless accompanied by an attorney may be considered a failure to report for purposes of VA regulations at 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 providing for discontinuance of benefits for failure to report for examination.  Similarly, a beneficiary may not insist on using a recording device at a VA medical examination, and refusal to participate due to absence of such a device may be considered a failure to report for purposes of VA regulations governing termination of benefits.
    VETERANS ADMINISTRATION GENERAL COUNSEL
    Vet. Aff. Op. Gen. Couns. Prec. 04-91
    PREC-04-91.pdf
    • 0 replies
    • 89 views
  10. Tbird added an answer to a question VA BLOG   

    vern2 the blog is what the va says and sadly they say a lot of things not all of them true and so now i just say we will see. here's some history from just last year
    House Committee on Veterans Affairs
    EVALUATION OF THE PROCESS TO ACHIEVE VBA GOALS - July 2014 http://veterans.house.gov/sites/republicans.veterans.house.gov/files/documents/113-80.pdf
    Here is an excerpt from the opening statement by Rep Jeff Miller
    • 0
  11. Tbird added an answer to a question Gofundme Campaign For Hadit.com   

    Your contributions help keep HadIt.com alive and well - Thank you. If you are able please consider a contribution.
    • 0
  12. Tbird added an answer to a question HEARING LOSS POSSSIBLE SMC's?   

    from what i read it should qualify you for smc k, not sure on cue but i'm sure others will chime in.
    • 0
  13. Tbird added an answer to a question What the......   

    ranger got your email address password was sent this am.
    • 0
  14. Tbird added an answer to a question PTSD steessors   

    This should be helpful
    • 0
  15. Tbird added an answer to a question What the......   

    ranger11bv -
    i've reset your password for ranger11bv, but you have an invalid email address, please pm me with the correct email address or i will need to delete the account. all accounts must have a valid email address.
     
    • 0