![]() ![]() The Nation's #1 Independent Veterans Web Site VA NEWS FLASH from Larry Scott at VA Watchdog dot Org -- 12-15-2006 #1 |
|
|
Printer Friendly Page
VA UPDATES "BLUE WATER NAVY" CLAIMS PROCESSING PROCEDURES -- Letter from Acting Director of Compensation & Pension Service lays out interim procedures for controlling claims affected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims decision in Haas v. Nicholson.
The VA continues to "fine-tune" their policy on handling claims from "Blue Water Navy" veterans. Background on the Haas or "Blue
Water Navy" decision here... However, the VA appealed the pro-veteran
decision and all claims are stalled...more here... And, here is the latest on the legal proceedings by the National Veterans Legal Services Program: The Secretary’s brief is due to be filed in the Haas appeal on January 8. Our brief will be due to be filed 40 days after the Secretary’s brief is served on us. The Secretary then may file a reply brief 14 days after that. Therefore, the briefing will likely be completed by early March, but there is a small possibility that either party may ask for, and be granted, extensions for those filings. The Court will then likely schedule oral argument and, after it hears the argument, issue a decision. The decision will likely be issued several months after the oral argument. We will almost certainly post something on our site once a decision is issued. Richard V. Spataro, Staff Attorney, National Veterans Legal Services Program, 1600 K Street, NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20006-2833 Below is the latest letter from the VA to all the Regional Offices. This letter was sent to me by email and includes some HTML glitches Letter below: --------------- DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Veterans Benefits Administration Washington , D.C. 20420
December 11, 2006
Director (00/21) In Reply Refer To: 211A All VA Regional Offices and Centers Fast Letter 06-26
SUBJ: Haas v. Nicholson This letter provides interim procedures for controlling claims affected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC or Court) decision in Haas v. Nicholson. The enclosure provides general answers to typical questions employees may receive during interviews or when answering telephones. BackgroundOn August 16, 2006, the Court determined that Vietnam veterans who served in the waters off Vietnam and did not set foot in Vietnam are entitled to a presumption of exposure to herbicide agents, to include Agent Orange. This class of veterans is generally known as �blue water� Navy veterans; but any claim, regardless of branch of service, may be a Haas case. Prior to this decision, VA�s interpretation of 38 CFR 3.307(a)(6)(iii) was that a service member had to have actually set foot on Vietnamese soil or served on a craft in its rivers (also known as �brown water�) in order to be entitled to the presumption of exposure to herbicides. Specifically, the Court held the following: � The reference to service in �Vietnam� as used in the statute was ambiguous because there are many definitions of the territory of a nation. � VA�s regulation defining Vietnam service for purposes of granting the presumption of exposure to herbicides, 38 CFR 3.307(a)(6)(iii), is ambiguous when viewed together with 38 CFR 3.313, which also defines service in Vietnam. The Court pointed to the use of different conjunctions, �and� in � 3.307 and �or� in � 3.313, as well as the differing placement of a comma in each regulation to prove the ambiguity and observed that VA had merely �replac[ed] legislative ambiguity with regulatory ambiguity.� � Because of its determination that ambiguity was present, the Court looked to a procedural manual (M21-1) provision from 1991 that stated that possession of Page 2. Director (00/21)
a Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) would be conceded as proof of Vietnam service in the absence of �contradictory evidence.� The Court held this to be a substantive rule establishing entitlement to the presumption of exposure to herbicides. It held that VA�s �attempted rescissions� of that M21-1 provision were void because they failed to comply with the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). The Court also held that within the meaning of VA�s manual provisions: 1) proof that a veteran had blue water service without setting foot on mainland Vietnam would not necessarily be �contradictory evidence,� but 2) proof that a veteran served in a location �that reasonably precluded exposure to Agent Orange� could be considered �contradictory evidence.�
Current Status VA has appealed the Haas decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Haas issues will not be adjudicated until this litigation is resolved. When claims with Haas issues are received, they will be acknowledged with specific language approved by the Office of General Counsel and controlled as indicated in this letter. Language Approved by General Counsel The following language will be used to acknowledge receipt of a claim for service connection that includes Haas issues: �We have received your claim for (insert the disability(ies)) based upon claimed herbicide exposure. Your claim may be affected by recent judicial action by the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in Haas v. Nicholson. VA has appealed that action to the Federal Circuit. We must await the outcome of that appeal and receive guidance from the Department of Veterans Affairs General Counsel prior to taking further action on your claim. We will advise you further when we receive guidance.�
Haas ClaimsClaims affected by Haas include those based on herbicide exposure for which the only evidence of exposure is receipt of the Vietnam Service Medal or service on a vessel off the shore of Vietnam. Page 3. Director (00/21) Claims not affected by the Haas decision include those claims based on herbicide exposure in which it is established by record that the veteran did set foot in the Republic of Vietnam, or claims based on herbicide exposure in which the veteran did not set foot in Vietnam, did not receive the Vietnam Service Medal, and did not serve off the shore of Vietnam. These claims should continue to be processed in the usual manner.
Controlling Claims Affected by HaasPending a final decision by the courts in Haas, regional offices must control claims from �blue water� Vietnam veterans (or veterans from another branch of service, as explained above) seeking presumptive service connection with end product 335 as explained below. The following procedures are required when a veteran seeks either to establish entitlement to service connection for a herbicide-related disease for the first time in a new or original claim or to reopen a previously denied exposure-related claim. These procedures are also applicable in cases where a veteran claims service connection for both an exposure-related disability and one not related to herbicide exposure. These procedures are intended to avoid delays in the adjudication of other claims and the unnecessary expenditure of resources in handling claims that may ultimately be overturned on appeal. Original (or new) claims involving only Haas 3.307 presumptions
Claims involving only Haas 3.307 presumptions (claims based on herbicide exposure which have previously been denied)
Page 4. Director (00/21)
Claims involving Haas 3.307 presumptions (claims related to herbicide exposure which are raised for the first time) and non-Haas issues
Appeals involving Haas issues
Page 5. Director (00/21)
Actions by the Board of Veterans� Appeals (BVA)On September 21, 2006, the Secretary issued a memorandum directing BVA to stay action and refrain from remanding all claims for service connection based on exposure to herbicides in which the only evidence of exposure is the receipt of the Vietnam Service Medal or service on a vessel off the shore of Vietnam. Because the Secretary's direction indicates his view that these claims should not be decided until the litigation runs its course, BVA has suspended action on Haas claims. For cases in which the only issue on appeal is a claim affected by the stay, BVA will retain and store the claims folder during the period of the stay. Once a final decision is reached on appeal in the Haas case, the adjudication of any cases that have been stayed will be resumed. In multiple-issue cases, the Board will adjudicate all issues that are not subject to the stay in accordance with normal procedures, and place appropriate controls on the issue(s) affected by the stay. If a regional office receives a decision from BVA that grants presumptive service connection under Haas v. Nicholson to a veteran who was not in-country in Vietnam, please send the folder to the C&P Policy Staff (211) prior to implementing the decision. The point of contact is Michele Katina.
QuestionsQuestions concerning this fast letter and other issues related to Haas should be submitted to the VAVBAWAS/CO/21Q&A mailbox.
/s/ Bradley G. Mayes Acting Director Compensation & Pension Service
Enclosure --------------- email Larry PGP key on request |
|
|
|