Navy News, news from Iraq - Navy Times

Group votes for more time for survivor claims

Survivors of deceased veterans could continue to pursue unpaid benefits, and in some cases even present new evidence for additional claims, under a proposal affirmed Wednesday by a congressionally appointed veterans’ benefits commission.

If enacted into law, the proposal would significantly expand survivors’ ability to seek such benefits. Currently, pending claims terminate with a veteran’s death.

The Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission was established by Congress in 2004 to study all benefits related to death or disability brought about by military service. In addition to the proposal to expand time for claims, the commission issued final decisions on eight other issues during the first session of a July 18-20 meeting in Washington: line of duty, time limit to file, lump-sum payments, “duty to assist,” apportionment/garnishment, reasonable doubt, character of discharge and age as a factor.

But the decisions did not come without considerable discussion and dissent.

Commissioner John Grady expressed concern over whether a veteran rated as disabled due to, say, diabetes — where Grady said choice of lifestyle is a factor in the condition — should receive the same benefits as a veteran disabled in combat. “It just seems to me like it’s questionable whether that’s good policy, to say that there’s no distinction between the package, based on the circumstances,” Grady said.

Grady was in the minority; the commission voted to affirm the current policy, which holds that service members on active duty are considered to be in the “line of duty” at all times.

There also was much discussion over whether troops who receive a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge in their last period of active duty should be ineligible for VA benefits. Currently, a dishonorable discharge precludes the awarding of benefits for the period of service affected by the ruling.

Commissioner Jim Livingston argued that such discharges are awarded for the most “horrendous” crimes under the Uniform Code of Military Justice: rape, murder, cowardice. “I think we need to send a message about good order and discipline,” he said.

But if that option were selected, said Commissioner Rick Surratt, “all the years of honorable service would be negated.” Others argued that courts treat enlistment periods as separate contracts and that allowing the discharge for one period to affect one’s entire career could create a constitutional conflict.

Despite his and several others’ concerns, the commission voted to side with Livingston, 9-4.

In other issues, the commission voted to affirm the current policy that grants unlimited time to file claims but added a recommendation that all service branches provide a mandatory VA benefits briefing, prior to discharge, to all separating troops, including those in the National Guard and reserve.

The commission also voted against recommending lump-sum compensation payments, although some studies have shown these might provide better compensation for veterans on the lower end, 10 percent to 20 percent, of the disability rating scale. It also affirmed VA’s “duty to assist,” adding that the agency should use “plain language” in stating how a claimant can request an early decision in their case.

The commission also voted to recommend that VA disability benefits, including traumatic injury insurance, should not be considered in state court spousal support proceedings. The exception would be VA compensation benefits received in lieu of military pay.

Finally, the commission decided, after much discussion, that age should not be a factor when considering service connection and rating severity of disability — but that it may be a consideration in setting compensation rates.

The Washington meeting of the commission is one in a series, all open to the public. Its final report is due to Congress on Oct. 1.