RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,172422,00.html

KUDOS to Tom Philpott for keeping us DAVs informed.

DFAS certainly has not.

How many IU DAVs will die as well before they see their seized retired pay. DFAS; sometimes later..........

I still haven't got my IOU DFAS. I'm looking forward to using it as toilet tissue paper.

Tom,

Have long appreciated your articles for the military in general. It is
good that progress is being achieved with CRDP and CRSC. There is
however an underlying issue which merits attention. That is the ignored
issue of concurrent receipt for the over 400,000 retired disabled
veterans who are in the 10% to 40% disability range who have service
connected disabilities lacking a “combat” merit badge. These are the
forgotten veterans who are in a status of “not worthy of consideration”
as deemed by the current administration, the pentagon with Dr. Chu and
his gang, veteran service organizations which ignore the issue, and
Congress itself which has no champion for the issue of concurrent
receipt for veterans in our category.

In the September-October 2004 DAV magazine, the DAV asked the then
presidential candidates the following question:

Do you support provision of concurrent receipt to veterans rated 40% or
less and will your administration actively work to bring it about? Why or
why not?

Do you support elimination of the phase-in period for concurrent receipt?
Why or why not?

President George W. Bush: I have addressed the issue of "concurrent
receipt" for military retirees in a fair and responsible manner. My
administration has been the first to act on allowing military retirees to
receive both disability compensation and retirement pay. I have twice
signed into law legislation effectively allowing military retirees to
receive VA disability compensation without having to offset the amount
from their retirement benefits. This policy for those military retirees
most deserving--combat-injured and highly-disabled veterans--finally
reverses, for the first time, a century-old prohibition on concurrent
receipt.

Senator John F. Kerry: I believe military retirees who have a
service-connected disability should receive both military retired pay and
disability compensation. I agree with DAV that any offset of military
retirement pay and disability compensation is unjust. No other category
of federal employee is subject to this kind of unfairness and it must
stop. Far too often in our history veterans' benefits are cut or reduced
based solely upon budgetary considerations. There are plenty of places to
cut back in government--but benefits for veterans are not one of them. As
President, I will actively push for full concurrent receipt.

This was truly the last effort by the DAV and other military veteran
service organizations to address the issue for the 40% or less category.
In the 2008 presidential election the issue is no longer discussed, but
the same 400,000 or more retired disabled veterans still are paying the
veterans disability tax, just as they did in the year 2004. We are the
“ignored veterans” the “unworthy” not by choice, but by administration,
congressional policy and abhorrence.

The Veterans Disability Benefit Commission was created because the
government did not want to address the issue of paying concurrent receipt
to 40% and under category. The administrations hope was that the VDBC
would rubber stamp their belief that this group of veterans was not
worthy of concurrent receipt. To the administrations surprise the
granting of concurrent receipt for this group of veterans 40% and under
in disability was among a group of strong recommendations made by the
commission.

Tom, PLEASE use your ability and your connections to inquire why this
issue is being ignored for this category of veterans. Cost is not the
main issue since over 70% of the cost of concurrent receipt has already
been paid according to research noted on the VDBC web site. The reason
for ignoring the issue can only be a belief by the Administration,
Pentagon, Congress, and the many veteran service organizations that we
are indeed the unworthy category as prescribed by legislation already
passed.

Would appreciate your help on this issue, and do hope that you are not
among the majority who are apathetic to the cause of concurrent receipt
for the forgotten majority of disabled veterans in the under 40%
disability range.

A BILL WAS FINALLY PACED FOR crsc but when you read the small print many vrts will get the SHAFT. YOU HAVE TO BE DRAWING COMPISATION FOR YOU crsc rating to be paid my self rated at 210 % 20 combat related not paid for it so I am betting the us goverment will shaft me out of 219 bucks and give the money to the IRAQI ARMT TO PAY TGHIER WAGEGES.

I agree 100% with "weavo2" and can't think of a thing to add. Tom told me some months ago that Senator Reid was going to submit an amendment to grant 100% concurrent reciept for all levels of VA disability......but it didn't happen did it? I particularly have to laugh when I think of Mr Bilirikis' HR 303 with every Republican in the House co-sponsering it....when the Dems put in a "Discharge Petition" to bring it out of committee....none of the Republican Reps would sign it....including the actual sponsor; if it had been brought to a vote we would have seen a lot of people voting against a bill that they co-sponsored....I'm assuming Bilirikis would have voted yes on his own bill.

quote:

Originally posted by weavo2:
Tom,

Have long appreciated your articles for the military in general. It is
good that progress is being achieved with CRDP and CRSC. There is
however an underlying issue which merits attention. That is the ignored
issue of concurrent receipt for the over 400,000 retired disabled
veterans who are in the 10% to 40% disability range who have service
connected disabilities lacking a “combat” merit badge. These are the
forgotten veterans who are in a status of “not worthy of consideration”
as deemed by the current administration, the pentagon with Dr. Chu and
his gang, veteran service organizations which ignore the issue, and
Congress itself which has no champion for the issue of concurrent
receipt for veterans in our category.

In the September-October 2004 DAV magazine, the DAV asked the then
presidential candidates the following question:

Do you support provision of concurrent receipt to veterans rated 40% or
less and will your administration actively work to bring it about? Why or
why not?

Do you support elimination of the phase-in period for concurrent receipt?
Why or why not?

President George W. Bush: I have addressed the issue of "concurrent
receipt" for military retirees in a fair and responsible manner. My
administration has been the first to act on allowing military retirees to
receive both disability compensation and retirement pay. I have twice
signed into law legislation effectively allowing military retirees to
receive VA disability compensation without having to offset the amount
from their retirement benefits. This policy for those military retirees
most deserving--combat-injured and highly-disabled veterans--finally
reverses, for the first time, a century-old prohibition on concurrent
receipt.

Senator John F. Kerry: I believe military retirees who have a
service-connected disability should receive both military retired pay and
disability compensation. I agree with DAV that any offset of military
retirement pay and disability compensation is unjust. No other category
of federal employee is subject to this kind of unfairness and it must
stop. Far too often in our history veterans' benefits are cut or reduced
based solely upon budgetary considerations. There are plenty of places to
cut back in government--but benefits for veterans are not one of them. As
President, I will actively push for full concurrent receipt.

This was truly the last effort by the DAV and other military veteran
service organizations to address the issue for the 40% or less category.
In the 2008 presidential election the issue is no longer discussed, but
the same 400,000 or more retired disabled veterans still are paying the
veterans disability tax, just as they did in the year 2004. We are the
“ignored veterans” the “unworthy” not by choice, but by administration,
congressional policy and abhorrence.

The Veterans Disability Benefit Commission was created because the
government did not want to address the issue of paying concurrent receipt
to 40% and under category. The administrations hope was that the VDBC
would rubber stamp their belief that this group of veterans was not
worthy of concurrent receipt. To the administrations surprise the
granting of concurrent receipt for this group of veterans 40% and under
in disability was among a group of strong recommendations made by the
commission.

Tom, PLEASE use your ability and your connections to inquire why this
issue is being ignored for this category of veterans. Cost is not the
main issue since over 70% of the cost of concurrent receipt has already
been paid according to research noted on the VDBC web site. The reason
for ignoring the issue can only be a belief by the Administration,
Pentagon, Congress, and the many veteran service organizations that we
are indeed the unworthy category as prescribed by legislation already
passed.

Would appreciate your help on this issue, and do hope that you are not
among the majority who are apathetic to the cause of concurrent receipt
for the forgotten majority of disabled veterans in the under 40%
disability range.

Thanks for the update. I waited for 23 years after release from AD in 1966 to receive my VA eligibilty. It went from 30% to 50% in 1992.
Can I request a review for a higher rate since I have had Heart surgery, back surgery and many other problems since then?

I also would like to Thank Tom for keeping us informed about this important issue. Everyday I have to live with my 30% rating which does even provide me with enough money to even make the co-payment when seeing a doctor. This is wrong and I don't see anyone working to correct this problem.
Also Thank you weavo2 for the great blog, made you should go run the DAV or the VA.

I am a service connected 100% R rated and IU veteran who served for 18 years. I have Multiple Sclerosis and therefore not "combat related". I will also NOT receive any concurrent receipt payments. When will they give all of us vets concurrent receipt when we were forced to retire? Seems like my 18 years were worthless to the country.

While I'm happy that o many guys are finally getting what we all deserve i'm also ticked off that those of us who were not injured in combat have been completely ignored. I'm retired USArmy and have a spinal cord injury incurred after SEA service. !00% disabled for 38 years and still proud of my service to my country but obviously my country just doesn't feel the same way. All these years of being cheated by concurrent rceipt and no end in sight. I guess all of us without combat wounds can just look forward to always paying the concurrent receipt. How fair is that. A vet is a vet retired is retired what more is there to say.

I am a veteran who served 10 years active Army, I was combat injured due to a vehicle, loaded with explosives exploding next to my vehicle in Iraq, I had multiple surgieries and now have a medal rod in my leg. I was denied a medical retirement from the Army and received a 50% rating through VA, I also recieved the Purple Heart and still I am not eligibe for the CRSC. What I want know is when are they going to look at veterans with those issues such as mine?

what can we do to cause our government to look at the vets with 40% or less disability amd get what they deserve. I have three approved disabilities, but the VA has rated one at 10% and two at 0%. two of the rating are for hypertenion and and Aneurysm both could cause by death at anytime. But the VA doesn't care. I am presently fighting the last 0% award (no monies) which took me three years to get the VA to admit that it happen while on active duty. I afraid that i will probably be dead, before I received what is fairly due me. Bill msg us army retired

I was forced to retire with less than 20 years (19 years 9 months), I have an 80% disbility rating from the VA, yet I am not eligiable to receive concurrent pay from both my service and the VA. Each month my retirement pay is reduced by the amount I receive from the VA.
When will the congress change the law for us retirees in this gray are so we can receive both pay.

You need to request from the Army or DOD for a Medical review Board, nobody with injuries especially combat related, get's denied for a chapter 61 or medical retirement, unless your discharge is other than honorable, don't get offended, it time you start visiting your State Rep's and senator's.

quote:

Originally posted by 7583366:
I am a veteran who served 10 years active Army, I was combat injured due to a vehicle, loaded with explosives exploding next to my vehicle in Iraq, I had multiple surgieries and now have a medal rod in my leg. I was denied a medical retirement from the Army and received a 50% rating through VA, I also recieved the Purple Heart and still I am not eligibe for the CRSC. What I want know is when are they going to look at veterans with those issues such as mine?

If you were denied retirement becuase your DoD rating was less than 30%, a new board is being established to review such cases that were adjudicated since 9-11-2001. I am posting updates on pebforum.com as they become available but the new law is below:

SEC. 1643. REVIEW OF SEPARATION OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES SEPARATED FROM SERVICE WITH A DISABILITY RATING OF 20 PERCENT DISABLED OR LESS.

(a) BOARD REQUIRED.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 79 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1554 the following new section:

§ 1554a. Review of separation with disability rating of 20 percent disabled or less

(a) IN GENERAL.—

(1) The Secretary of Defense shall establish within the Office of the Secretary of Defense a board of review to review the disability determinations of covered individuals by Physical Evaluation Boards. The board shall be known as the ‘Physical Disability Board of Review’.

(2) The Physical Disability Board of Review shall consist of not less than three members appointed by the Secretary.

(b) COVERED INDIVIDUALS.—For purposes of this section, covered individuals are members and former members of the armed forces who, during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on December 31,2009—

(1) are separated from the armed forces due to unfitness for duty due to a medical condition with a disability rating of 20 percent disabled or less; and

(2) are found to be not eligible for retirement.

(c) REVIEW.—

(1) Upon the request of a covered individual, or a surviving spouse, next of kin, or legal representative of a covered individual, the Physical Disability Board of Review shall review the findings and decisions of the Physical Evaluation Board with respect to such covered individual. Subject to paragraph (3), upon its own motion, the Physical Disability Board of Review may review the findings and decisions of the Physical Evaluation Board with respect to a covered individual.

(2) The review by the Physical Disability Board of Review under paragraph (1) shall be based on the records of the armed force concerned and such other evidence as may be presented to the Physical Disability Board of Review. A witness may present evidence to the Board by affidavit or by any other means considered acceptable by the Secretary of Defense.

(3) If the Physical Disability Board of Review proposes to review, upon its own motion, the findings and decisions of the Physical Evaluation Board with respect to a covered individual, the Physical Disability Board of Review shall notify the covered individual, or a surviving spouse, next of kin, or legal representative of the covered individual, of the proposed review and obtain the consent of the covered individual or a surviving spouse, next of kin, or legal representative of the covered individual before proceeding with the review.

(4) With respect to any review by the Physical Disability Board of Review of the findings and decisions of the Physical Evaluation Board with respect to a covered individual, whether initiated at the request of the covered individual or a surviving spouse, next of kin, or legal representative of the covered individual or initiated by the Physical Disability Board of Review, the Physical Disability Board of Review shall notify the covered individual or a surviving spouse, next of kin, or legal representative of the covered individual that, as a result of the request or consent, the covered individual or a surviving spouse, next of kin, or legal representative of the covered individual may not seek relief from the Board for Correction of Military Records operated by the Secretary concerned.

(d) AUTHORIZED RECOMMENDATIONS.—The Physical Disability Board of Review may, as a result of its findings under a review under subsection (c), recommend to the Secretary concerned the following (as applicable) with respect to a covered individual:

(1) No recharacterization of the separation of such individual or modification of the disability rating previously assigned such individual.

(2) The recharacterization of the separation of such individual to retirement for disability.

(3) The modification of the disability rating previously assigned such individual by the Physical Evaluation Board concerned, which modified disability rating may not be a reduction of the disability rating previously assigned such individual by that Physical Evaluation Board.

(4) The issuance of a new disability rating for such individual.

(e) CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS.—

(1) The Secretary concerned may correct the military records of a covered individual in accordance with a recommendation made by the Physical Disability Board of Review under subsection (d). Any such correction may be made effective as of the effective date of the action taken on the report of the Physical Evaluation Board to which such recommendation relates.

(2) In the case of a member previously separated pursuant to the findings and decision of a Physical Evaluation Board together with a lump-sum or other payment of back pay and allowances at separation, the amount of pay or other monetary benefits to which such member would be entitled based on the member’s military record as corrected shall be reduced to take into account receipt of such lump-sum or other payment in such manner as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate.

(3) If the Physical Disability Board of Review makes a recommendation not to correct the military records of a covered individual, the action taken on the report of the Physical Evaluation Board to which such recommendation relates shall be treated as final as of the date of such action.

(f) REGULATIONS.—

(1) This section shall be carried out in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.

(2) The regulations under paragraph (1) shall specify reasonable deadlines for the performance of reviews required by this section.

(3) The regulations under paragraph (1) shall specify the effect of a determination or pending determination of a Physical Evaluation Board on considerations by boards for correction of military records under section 1552 of this title.’’.

(2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 79 of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1554 the following new item:

‘‘1554a. Review of separation with disability rating of 20 percent disabled or less.’’.

(b) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish the board of review required by section 1554a of title 10, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), and prescribe the regulations required by such section, not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

I know a great way to save the government money. Treat all disabilities (especially SSA) in the same way the government treats those who risked their lives for the country--reduce their retirement checks by using the disability offset. While you're at it, eliminate all retroactive pay for SSA and similar programs.
Why are we subject to this discrimination? What happened to equality under the law?

ALSO HELP WOMAN PRIOR TO 9-11 for CH.61's see rest beklow.

????: How can we Woman get the DD-214 via BNRC be sped up for true ch. 61's as to change what original DD-214's have to DD-215's with have med ret due comat/combat-simulated injuiesinjurieswriting was

Attempting to go through changing DD-214 via BNRC as woman when "med ret" even if injuries mutiple in 4 different countries 3 NATO exerces men always saw on theirs if the case as mine xx% for combat-simulat training injury pay or combat injury w/ xx% listed on DD-214s the woman who passed for years at Parris Island absoulute same medical diagnosis as their male conter parts from recruit training or once in awhile saw a DI's DD-214's again same injury allowed time to heal, and ranks, w approximate iome in service WOMAN ALWAYS got a "piece of paper (DD-214) and the old fashion "leaper treatment" handshake regardless of rank!from everyone during amd after Gulf 1/Persian Gulf War.
DO NOT Know how to conact these former recruit Woman as now CH. 61 rate some of the pay as injuries occured during combat-simulated training!! guys are getting the pay! woman rate it but wont see anything for 5 years figure SLOW MOVING,BNRC, THEN ON THE DFAS AND LOSY VA system.

For me some regions do not even recognice my diagosis w spinal cord disease:<??? otherrs absolutley do suchh as where I live a very rural\farm land region.Not the spinsal cord unit in Long beach when i ddid live there & my disease put me inbto a weelchair; which a C&P has yet to acknowledge.
I am now on my 2nd letter og NOTICE OF DISAGREEMENT (NOD) missing many systemic systems wrong physically, besides typo left off tinnius/ hearing loss (thats back on) but "hearing loss not service connected! I was in the band first until hearing loss og 65% and 55% then 3-moonth hearing program speciak=l for practic/e ear plug system. then have copy of duy stations wtc shows I was trasnsfered from band to a "quite" enviromrntal MOS (ADMIN) under 6 months at time on contract.
woman w agent orangew VA again says no, have heard that in SoCal and more.
glad mmoved . this the 5th VA region I have been to knows my disea has a real DOCTOR! who stays up truely on new med info! but va here will NOT ALLOW HER ACSESS TO A FLUROSCOPY FOR ME AND 100's other vets she sees for chronic pain!
fighting VA for 14+ years to get my diagnosis all the physicals tthen PTSD and chronic pain are also a "mental defect" but VA will only recognze ONE but 1000+ physical parts doc then cant se wholle picture of VAT.

REPEAT ????: How can we Woman get the DD-214 via BNRC be sped up for true ch. 61's as to change what original DD-214's have to DD-215's with have med ret due incomat/combat-simulated trainig injuies..



Thanks!!!

I think the whole thing is ridiculous! One thing has absolutely nothing to do with the other. They NEVER should have lumped retired pay with disability pay. I am a retired vet with 30%. My disability is about 400. Big friggin' deal! So they make 400 dollars none-taxable.
Retirement pay should be retirement pay.Period!
Disability pay should be disabilitiy pay. Period! Regardless if it's 100% or 10%. They ARE NOT THE SAME. What really tweaks my eyebrows is that a great deal of this is because of the Iraq conflict. Those guys deserve whatever they get, but I did my "time" in the military as well, combat or not! If that aint discrimination, I dont know what is!

Where are chapter 61 retirees with less than 20 years service who are sevice connected not due
to a combat related injury do we get left out.

This whole concurrent disability compensation thing is really very simple. Figure it out. The DOD is the largest employer of government employees. It's all factored in that it would cost millions in disability checks each month for retired military members even if only rated 10% by the VA. Now the US Postal Service is the second largest employer of government workers with something like 800,000 employees. You ask why do postal employees receive concurrent receipt. The answer is that there isn't many retired military. Then again, if you were in the military and worked for the USPS you could receive full retirement pay after 30 years and also be serve-connected and be monetarily compensated by the VA. Where's the parity you ask. There isn't any, just a case of economics. Just that simple.

I'm curious and a bit confused. Does anybody know if the VA retro will go back to Jan 2005 for everyone who is retired and is also rated 100% for IU, regardless of when the IU was awarded? Thanks in advance.