Plain English

V.ii.2.D.1.a · Two ways the primary disability can establish secondary service connection

First, a service-connected disability can cause another disability: the additional disability resulted from it, or would not have happened without it. Second, it can make a separate, non-service-connected disability more severe. That includes a condition that would have been less severe if the service-connected disability had not interfered with treatment.

The manual calls this the but-for standard: compare what happened with what would have happened without the service-connected disability. The service-connected condition need not be the only cause. Do not replace this with a stricter proximate-cause test.

Aggravation does not have to be permanent. The current manual also directs VA not to consider natural progression of the non-service-connected disability when deciding this kind of aggravation claim. These instructions reflect Spicer and Ward; do not import the different in-service aggravation test into a secondary claim. The original block links 3.310, 1110, Allen, Spicer, and Ward for the governing authorities.

V.ii.2.D.1.b · A later diagnosis or award does not rule out an earlier causal relationship

There must be evidence that the additional disability resulted from, or would not have occurred without, the primary service-connected disability. But the primary disability did not have to be formally diagnosed or already service connected on the day the additional disability began.

The manual's example involves longstanding back and nerve symptoms that caused a fall and shoulder injury before the nerve condition was formally diagnosed or service connected. Credible history and a supporting medical opinion can establish that sequence. The later diagnosis and award do not, by themselves, defeat causation.

Verify the actual history and current status of the primary disability. Do not assume entitlement to a still-pending primary claim. When a secondary claim predates the primary claim, apply the separate effective-date procedure in V.ii.4.A.3.g; this causation rule does not supply an effective date by itself. The original also links Frost.

V.ii.2.D.1.c · Establish how severe the condition was before the added worsening

For secondary aggravation, the baseline is the condition's severity before the worsening attributable to the service-connected disability. A baseline is required both to establish entitlement on this basis and to determine the evaluation.

Look for medical evidence created before aggravation. If that is not available, consider the earliest medical evidence created between the onset of aggravation and receipt of the evidence establishing current severity. Also consider other credible evidence that helps establish the baseline, including lay evidence.

A lay statement may not establish the baseline by itself, but it can support the finding or show that more evidence needs to be obtained. Do not disregard it simply because it is not a medical report. Follow the lay-evidence procedure in V.ii.1.B.2 and the baseline-development steps that follow.

V.ii.2.D.1.d · Help obtain baseline evidence before deciding that it is missing

The claimant ultimately must provide evidence supporting a baseline, but VA still has its duty to assist. Obtain relevant identified evidence and consider an examination or medical opinion when the examination threshold is met.

The evidence should show severity before aggravation, or as soon afterward as possible while still preceding receipt of the evidence that establishes current severity. Missing a pre-aggravation treatment record does not automatically mean every possible baseline source has failed.

The rating activity makes the legal baseline determination from the whole record. An examiner can provide medical findings and analysis that help with it. When warranted under IV.i.1.B.1.e, request a claims-folder review and an opinion addressing whether the increased manifestations resulted from, or would not have occurred without, the service-connected disability. Do not add an already-established baseline as an extra prerequisite for ordering that warranted assessment.

V.ii.2.D.1.e · Check what the aggravation report actually answers

The report must separately provide the current severity of the claimed condition; an opinion on the required secondary-aggravation relationship; and an adequate medical explanation supporting that opinion.

The relationship question is whether there was any increase that would not have occurred without the service-connected disability, or whether the condition would have been less severe without it. Include interference with or impeded treatment when the record raises that possibility.

A report that only says the primary disability did not cause the secondary condition does not answer a separately raised aggravation question. Likewise, an unexplained conclusion or a permanent-worsening requirement does not satisfy the current instructions. Use the original-request and provider-correction rules to obtain what is missing; do not substitute your own medical conclusion.

V.ii.2.D.1.f · If the baseline still cannot be established after assistance is complete

The manual directs denial of secondary aggravation when no baseline can be established, but only after VA completes the necessary evidence assistance. That can include an examination or opinion when warranted. Missing baseline evidence at the start of development is not the same as an unsupported baseline after development is finished.

Never assume the baseline was zero percent just because the evidence does not establish it. The rating narrative must explain why the degree of aggravation cannot be determined from the available evidence and why the aggravation claim therefore must be denied.

Keep any separate causation or other service-connection theory under review. A baseline is part of this aggravation analysis; failure to establish it does not itself answer a distinct causation question. The original block links the records-assistance, examination, and pre-decision duty-to-assist procedures.

V.ii.2.D.1.g · Calculate the evaluation from the established current and baseline severities

For an aggravation grant, the rating activity determines what schedular percentage represents the established baseline and what percentage represents the current disability. Subtract the baseline percentage from the current percentage to obtain the evaluation attributable to aggravation.

This subtraction still applies when current severity is rated 100 percent, including a temporary total evaluation under 4.29 or 4.30. Do not treat a current total evaluation as automatically erasing the baseline deduction. Apply the correct rating criteria to each supported severity level; the tool does not infer those percentages from a diagnosis.

V.ii.2.D.1.h · Actual worsening can support service connection at zero percent

A condition can genuinely worsen without moving into a higher schedular percentage. When competent, credible evidence establishes worsening from an established baseline because of the service-connected disability, the manual directs a grant at zero percent if baseline and current severity fall in the same schedular evaluation level.

Do not require worsening by at least one full schedular level to establish secondary aggravation. Distinguish this supported zero-percent result from an unknown baseline: an unknown baseline must not be assumed to be zero. The original block links Browder and Hensley for the underlying distinction.

V.ii.2.A.1.a · Start with the three required elements

Direct service connection requires a current disability, a disease/injury/event in service, and a relationship between them. Review all relevant medical and lay evidence, including the places, types, and circumstances of service. A service event alone is not the whole claim.

The relationship may be established through the listed-chronic-disease rules in 3.303(b), or through the medical nexus and continuous-symptom evidence described in 3.303(a). Apply the evidence and reasonable-doubt rules linked in the original block.

V.ii.2.A.1.b · A disability can count even if it later resolves

A disability present when the claim was filed or while it was pending satisfies the current-disability element even if it resolves before the decision. A diagnosis near the claim date—approximately within the preceding year—can also establish this element after case-specific review. This is an evidence review, not an automatic one-year exclusion rule.

Distinguish three situations. A clear valid diagnosis that later resolves can support a grant, generally with staged evaluations, when the other requirements are met. An earlier treating or unconfirmed diagnosis that is now absent but has not been reconciled needs a medical opinion about whether it was valid. A reasoned finding that the earlier diagnosis was erroneous supports denial when no other medical evidence refutes it.

The manual contrasts well-established recurring eczema with a later examination finding no active pathology, and claimed sinusitis where the medical evidence instead establishes a traumatic deviated septum and explains why sinusitis was not actually present. Preserve the supported alternative condition rather than treating every earlier label as a confirmed diagnosis.

V.ii.2.A.1.c · An adequate direct nexus does not need a redundant opinion

Under 3.303(a), medical evidence or an opinion can establish the relationship to service. Competent medical evidence of continuous symptoms can also establish that relationship, including for conditions that are not on the 3.309(a) chronic-disease list. When nexus is already established, another nexus opinion is unnecessary.

Here continuous symptoms means symptoms continuing or regularly recurring with minimal interruption from service. Isolated symptoms that do not establish that relationship may call for a medical opinion when the examination threshold is met.

V.ii.2.A.1.d · Use the special chronicity rule only for listed diseases

The chronicity and continuity route in 3.303(b) applies to diseases listed in 3.309(a). When this rule establishes nexus, an additional nexus opinion is unnecessary. A condition being medically chronic is not by itself proof that it belongs to that regulatory list.

V.ii.2.A.1.e · Identify real chronic disease in service

For a listed chronic disease established in service, later manifestations of that same disease are service connected unless an intercurrent cause explains them. The in-service evidence must identify the disease and establish chronic disability; isolated findings or the word chronic in a diagnosis are insufficient.

The manual’s example is arthritis confirmed by X-ray during service, claimed years later, with no intervening injury. Silent later treatment records do not create a need for a nexus opinion when onset and chronicity are already established. If chronicity is legitimately uncertain, examine continuity. Nonlisted diseases use the 3.303(a) nexus route.

V.ii.2.A.1.f · Use continuity when listed-disease chronicity is uncertain

Continuity of symptomatology can establish the relationship for a 3.309(a) disease when the condition noted in service was not clearly chronic or its chronicity may legitimately be questioned. This particular 3.303(b) route is limited to the listed diseases; it does not erase other ways to establish a direct nexus.

V.ii.2.A.1.g · A diagnosis after discharge can still be related to service

Under 3.303(d), consider direct service connection even when the disease was first diagnosed after discharge. Review all evidence on whether it was incurred in service rather than treating the later diagnosis date as an automatic bar.

V.ii.2.A.1.h · Do not make your own medical finding that an injury was temporary

An acute condition is short-lived, has identifiable symptoms, and resolves without apparent residuals. A transitory condition is not permanent. The manual gives colds, pneumonia, bruises, and certain seasonal or allergen-triggered reactions as examples.

Do not independently label a service injury acute and transitory without competent medical evidence addressing chronic disability. Allergic conditions require the whole evidentiary showing under 3.380, although seasonal or acute manifestations resolving after the allergen is removed are generally acute.

V.ii.2.A.2.a · Check the actual entrance examination

Soundness generally means the claimant was sound when examined, accepted, and enrolled, except for a condition actually noted at entry or rebuttal by clear and unmistakable evidence of both preexistence and no aggravation. A reported history alone is not a notation.

An examination must have occurred, but its report need not still be available: a lost report does not defeat soundness. An entry finding must meet the applicable definition of disability. Abnormal hearing below the VA hearing-loss criteria in 3.385 does not itself establish a noted hearing-loss disability.

V.ii.2.A.2.b · Check the service period’s soundness requirements

Peacetime service before January 1, 1947 requires six months or more of active continuous service under 3.305(b). Wartime service and peacetime service from January 1, 1947 have no minimum-service requirement for this presumption under 3.304(b). The separate entrance-examination and other applicability requirements still matter.

V.ii.2.A.2.c · VA must establish both facts to rebut soundness

When the condition was not noted and soundness applies, rebuttal requires undebatable evidence that the disease or injury manifesting in service both existed beforehand and was not aggravated. Preexistence alone is insufficient.

Personality disorders are not diseases or injuries for this presumption. Even when soundness applies, service connection still requires a nexus between current disability and the service disease or injury.

V.ii.2.A.2.d · Evaluate breaks in continuous service case by case

An extended unauthorized absence or other extended non-pay period can interrupt active continuous service, but every absence does not automatically do so. Examine its nature, length, circumstances, and effect on continuous duty.

The original contrasts an absence lasting 1,344 days followed by only nine days of duty, which did not meet the relevant continuity requirement, with a 13-day absence followed by a voluntary return that did not break continuity for the cited presumption. These examples illustrate case-specific analysis rather than a new fixed absence cutoff.

V.ii.2.A.2.e · ADT soundness has additional prerequisites

For an ADT-based claim, apply soundness only when there was an examination at entry into the actual ADT period and previously established Veteran status from prior active military service discharged under conditions other than dishonorable. Prior Veteran status does not replace the examination requirement.

Read the linked aggravation article separately for the Hill exception when service connection for one disability establishes active service and Veteran status for the same training period. That exception is different from assuming all training periods carry the active-duty presumptions.

V.ii.2.A.2.f · Verify what makes an IADT period qualifying service

IADT does not count as active service merely because training occurred. The rule covers disability from a qualifying injury, and the specified acute myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, or cerebrovascular accident during IADT, including the applicable direct-travel provisions. Ordinary disease alone is not the same as a qualifying injury or listed event.

The manual recognizes disabling injury from an anthrax or COVID-19 vaccine during IADT and PTSD resulting from MST during IADT as potential qualifying injuries. Check the actual period, event, direct travel where applicable, and linked rules.

V.ii.2.A.3.a · Verify when and under what circumstances an injury occurred

Development and rating must review STRs and personnel evidence to establish that the injury occurred during service and in line of duty. A current wound residual could instead come from an injury before or after service. Follow the linked misconduct and line-of-duty rules when raised.

V.ii.2.A.3.b · Describe an uncertain scar without inventing its cause

A scar can have existed at entry, arisen during service, or resulted from a later injury. If its origin is uncertain, describe it without calling it a gunshot or shrapnel residual unless the evidence supports that description.

V.ii.2.A.3.c · Connect a claimed scar to the actual service evidence

When an examination identifies a scar in a scarring claim, review official records to determine whether it resulted from a service wound. If the evidence is in approximate balance on that relationship, apply reasonable doubt and award service connection as the manual directs. Review the linked scope rule for scars reasonably included in another claimed issue.

V.ii.2.A.3.d · Combat evidence can establish occurrence without an official record

Accept satisfactory lay or other evidence consistent with the circumstances, conditions, or hardships of combat when clear and convincing contrary evidence does not refute it. Missing official documentation alone does not defeat that supported combat occurrence.

This lightens proof of the service disease, injury, or aggravation. It does not dispense with current disability and nexus. Follow the linked rules for establishing combat participation and weighing the evidence.

V.ii.2.A.3.e · Assess credibility from the evidence

Satisfactory evidence generally means credible evidence. Consider internal consistency and plausibility, and assess contradictions with other evidence using the manual’s credibility and weighing rules. Explain the evidence finding rather than using an unsupported credibility label.

V.ii.2.C.1.a · Choose the correct legal starting point

A condition actually noted at entry uses the aggravation framework in 38 U.S.C. 1153. A condition not noted, but later alleged or shown to preexist service, requires the soundness analysis under 1111 when that presumption applies. The two situations place different burdens on VA and the claimant.

V.ii.2.C.1.b · Use supported evidence to establish preexistence

When soundness applies, only clear and unmistakable evidence establishes preexistence. Carefully weigh medical records from before, during, and after service and credible lay history. Do not rely on speculation; the medical analysis must account for the history, data, and accepted understanding of the condition’s nature and course.

V.ii.2.C.1.c · An MEB or PEB conclusion needs an explanation

Give service Medical Evaluation Board and Physical Evaluation Board reports their proper evidentiary weight. A bare conclusion that a condition preexisted service and was not aggravated, without supporting analysis, is not enough by itself to rebut soundness or deny the claim.

V.ii.2.C.1.d · Apply the rules for history and statements against interest

There is no absolute requirement for contemporaneous pre-service clinical records. A later medical opinion based on the Veteran’s history may establish preexistence if it meets the clear-and-unmistakable standard after all probative evidence is weighed.

A signed in-service statement against the claimant’s interest about onset cannot be used without other evidence establishing preexistence under 3.304(b)(3); consider the remaining evidence as if that restricted statement did not exist. Other voluntary admissions may be considered with appropriate credibility and weight.

V.ii.2.C.2.a · Where soundness applies, VA must rebut both preexistence and aggravation

VA needs clear and unmistakable evidence both that the disability preexisted service and that service did not aggravate it. The latter means undebatable evidence of no increase, or that an increase was due to natural progression.

Review the entire record. Absence of a documented injury, pre-service records, or post-service treatment does not alone answer the medical course or shift the burden to the Veteran. Its relevance depends on supported medical analysis.

V.ii.2.C.2.b · For a noted condition, first determine whether it worsened

For a preexisting condition noted at entry into active service, the claimant first establishes an increase in disability during service. Once that increase is proven, presume aggravation unless clear and unmistakable evidence shows it was due to natural progression.

Always address aggravation when claimed. A decision declining service connection must explain the relevant evidence before, during, and after service and why it establishes no increase or natural progression. Use independent medical evidence, not speculation.

V.ii.2.C.2.c · Training-period aggravation differs, with a same-period exception

Ordinarily, ADT or IADT aggravation requires direct evidence of permanent worsening during the qualifying training period beyond natural progression; the usual presumption does not automatically apply.

Under the Hill exception, if a grant for another disability establishes Veteran status and active service for the same ADT/IADT period, the presumption of aggravation applies to another preexisting disability when an entrance examination or other contemporaneous evidence establishes its baseline. A grant relating to a different period does not by itself establish this exception.

V.ii.2.C.2.d · Keep the two burdens separate

No disability noted at entry with applicable soundness: VA must clearly and unmistakably establish both preexistence and no aggravation. Disability noted at entry: a supported increase triggers aggravation unless clearly and unmistakably due to natural progression. Do not require the claimant to prove aggravation under the first situation’s unrebutted soundness presumption.

V.ii.2.C.2.e · Temporary symptoms are not always underlying worsening

Under the ordinary preexisting-condition rule, temporary or intermittent flare-ups are insufficient unless the underlying condition worsened. A condition being in remission at entry and symptomatic later is not by itself proof of aggravation. Apply the special combat/POW rules separately when relevant.

V.ii.2.C.2.f · Separate ordinary treatment effects from other aggravation

The usual effects of treatment intended to correct or improve a preexisting condition—such as ordinary postoperative scars or absent/poorly functioning parts—are not service connected unless the disease or injury was otherwise aggravated by service. Review actual medical findings about the underlying condition and residuals.

V.ii.2.C.2.g · A chronic-disease presumption can establish aggravation

The Splane rule permits presumptive aggravation when a preexisting chronic disease first reaches a degree of at least 10 percent within the applicable post-service presumptive period. Verify the disease, service, time, and degree requirements. Affirmative contrary evidence or an intercurrent post-service disease/injury can rebut it under 3.307.

V.ii.2.C.2.h · Apply the special combat and POW aggravation rules

For combat, accept satisfactory evidence of aggravation consistent with service circumstances despite missing official records, unless clear and convincing evidence refutes it. Current disability and competent nexus evidence remain required.

Under 3.306(b)(2), symptomatic manifestations during or proximately after enemy action or former-POW captivity trigger the aggravation presumption unless clear and convincing evidence establishes no increase or natural progression. Do not apply the ordinary flare-up rule without considering this exception.

V.ii.2.C.2.i · Review the entire medical history in combat cases

When assessing rebuttal, consider all relevant factors, including record availability, the nature and course of the disability, elapsed time, and periods without complaint. Missing treatment records do not necessarily mean the disability was absent, particularly in combat. Explain how the evidence bears on the actual condition rather than equating silence with no disability.

V.ii.2.C.3.a · Look beyond entrance records for the baseline

The baseline review draws on all medical records for the condition. It is not restricted to the enlistment and entry-on-duty records. Obtain and consider relevant evidence before deciding what severity was present at entrance.

V.ii.2.C.3.b · Deduct only an ascertainable entrance evaluation, with a total-evaluation exception

After in-service aggravation under 1153 is established, deduct the supported entrance evaluation from the present evaluation when the entrance percentage is ascertainable. If it is not ascertainable, do not deduct it. Do not make a baseline deduction when the disability has a total 100-percent evaluation under 4.22.

These are in-service aggravation rules. Secondary aggravation under 3.310 has different baseline and total-evaluation instructions; use the actual legal basis.

V.ii.2.C.3.c · Real aggravation can result in a zero-percent evaluation

Actual increased severity can establish aggravation even when current and baseline severities fall within the same schedular percentage. In that situation, grant service connection and assign a noncompensable evaluation. The disability need not cross a rating-percentage threshold to have worsened. The no-deduction exception for a total evaluation still applies.

V.ii.2.E.1.a · A defect is generally static

A congenital or developmental defect is a normally static structural or inherent abnormality, usually present from birth and generally incapable of improvement or deterioration. Examples include certain fused vertebrae, an atrial septal defect, pectus excavatum, mental deficiency, and undescended testicles.

Soundness does not apply to such a defect because it is not a disease or injury within the relevant statutes. Still review whether a superimposed service disease or injury caused additional disability under the later block.

V.ii.2.E.1.b · A hereditary disease can change over time

A congenital, developmental, or hereditary disease can improve or deteriorate and may first appear in adulthood. The manual gives polycystic kidney disease, sickle cell disease, retinitis pigmentosa, and Huntington’s chorea as examples. Follow the linked disease-specific rules where applicable.

V.ii.2.E.1.c · Heredity does not automatically prevent service connection

Congenital defects, refractive error, personality disorders, and mental deficiency are ordinarily not compensable diseases or injuries under 3.303(c). But a congenital or hereditary disease can qualify if it first manifests during service, progresses abnormally during service when preexisting, or meets the listed-chronic-disease presumption after discharge. Additional disability caused by an overlying disease or injury to a congenital defect can also qualify.

A degenerative condition is not a congenital defect. Genetic predisposition alone cannot rebut soundness or the chronic-disease presumption, sever service connection, or reduce a disability evaluation.

The original explains that historical retinitis pigmentosa guidance did not prohibit in-service aggravation grants; the subsequent opinions and manual changes were therefore not liberalizing changes. Keep that distinction in any effective-date review and follow the linked eye, severance, presumption, and abnormal-laboratory-finding rules.

V.ii.2.E.1.d · Ask a medical question that distinguishes defect from disease

When the classification is unclear and medical input is needed, ask whether the condition can improve or deteriorate. The opinion helps decide whether it is a disease process or a static abnormality. Weigh the opinion with the rest of the record; it is probative, but not the sole legal determination.

V.ii.2.E.1.e · Use actual manifestation rather than inherited risk as onset

An inherited likelihood of eventually developing a disease is not the disease itself. Actual signs or symptoms of pathology followed by a diagnosis establish manifestation, using case-specific medical evidence and sound medical judgment. A hereditary disease can be incurred in service when those manifestations begin after entry.

Apply soundness when its entrance and service requirements are met. A clear entry examination cannot be overcome merely by heredity; rebuttal still requires clear and unmistakable evidence of both preexistence and no aggravation.

V.ii.2.E.1.f · Abnormal progression requires medical support

When hereditary disease had symptoms before service, it may be aggravated if it progresses during service faster than normally expected according to accepted medical authority. This is a factual medical determination based on the record and sound judgment. Apply the appropriate noted-versus-unnoted entrance and aggravation rules when deciding the claim.

VIII.iv.6.A.1.a · Compensation as if service connected

Section 1151 can pay compensation for qualifying additional disability caused by VA hospital care, treatment or examination, an approved rehabilitation program, or compensated work therapy. It can also apply to death, but survivor processing has its own rules. A qualifying disability is compensated as if service connected; it is not actually service connected. Read section B for the applicable eligibility, causation, and claim-date requirements.

VIII.iv.6.A.1.b · Gather the entire incident record

The evidence may include medical, surgical, hospital clinical records, and nurses’ notes. Upload all associated clinical reports, progress notes, and hospital summaries available in CAPRI or JLV. A short treatment summary may leave out the records needed to understand the incident and the condition before and afterward.

VIII.iv.6.A.1.c · Make the comprehensive facility request

The manual requires comprehensive incident development through CAPRI’s electronic VA Form 10-7131. In the 7131 REQUEST tab, select OTHER/EXAM (REVIEW REMARKS) and use the original block’s prescribed COMMENTS template. Enter the actual patient identifiers, claimed condition, incident date, and treatment period in the VA system; the personal reference tool does not need those identifiers.

The template requests medical records, surgical records, hospital clinical records, nurses’ notes, and other injury documentation for the specified period. CAPRI supports up to four pages of request text and tracks request status. Ordinary CAPRI/JLV downloads do not replace this comprehensive request. Follow the linked records, response, and opinion procedures; submitting a request is not receipt of the evidence.

VIII.iv.6.A.1.d · Quality-assurance reports have a separate request rule

Request quality-assurance investigative reports only when the claimant identifies them as necessary evidence, meets the stated record-identification requirements, and supplies enough information to locate them. Do not automatically request every quality-assurance report in every 1151 case.

If VHA denies access for a reason other than the records no longer being available, request OGC review using the linked OGC procedure. An OGC access review is not appropriate when the records are no longer available. Keep that distinction separate from the ordinary clinical-record request, and apply the relevant effort and notice rules to missing evidence.

II.iii.2.B.1.a · A supplemental claim asks VA to revisit a decided benefit

A claimant or authorized representative uses a complete prescribed application to disagree with a prior initial or supplemental decision on the same or similar benefit and basis. It may be filed at any time, including after a decision issued before February 19, 2019. Filing later can affect the effective date; it does not make the review option unavailable.

II.iii.2.B.1.b · Separate a new theory from a different benefit

A new service-connection theory for the same disability is a supplemental claim. Switching from direct to secondary service connection, for example, supplies sufficient new and relevant evidence. IU may also be reasonably raised while another supplemental issue is reviewed.

Changing from service connection under 1110 to compensation under 1151, or vice versa, is a distinct benefit rather than merely a new SC theory. Do not require supplemental readjudication just because the disability is the same. Use the increase-claim rules to distinguish current worsening from disagreement with a prior evaluation.

II.iii.2.B.1.c · Use the supplemental form

The prescribed form is VA Form 20-0995. Confirm the actual substantially complete application and applicable signature rules. Evidence submitted without the required form is not automatically a supplemental claim.

II.iii.2.B.1.d · Potentially new evidence is a lower threshold than proof of NRE

At the application-completeness stage, accept any submitted or identified evidence as potentially new; do not first demand that it be nonduplicative or relevant. Review evidence with the claim, additional treatment records, and evidence received while the record was closed, including during HLR or after a decision without a claim.

If potentially new evidence exists, complete warranted development. If none is needed, take the appropriate authorization action or refer for a rating decision after any applicable Section 5103 response period. A substantially complete supplemental claim requires a decision; the rating activity then determines whether the evidence is actually new and relevant. If no potentially new evidence is found after the required screening, use the incomplete-application procedure.

II.iii.2.B.1.e · A missing completeness requirement needs the correct notice

Use II.iii.1.C.2.b to notify the claimant and representative of the missing information. A substantially complete supplemental claim must be received within 60 days of VA’s incomplete-application notice to preserve the incomplete filing date for potential effective-date purposes. This clock starts with the notice, not the application’s receipt.

X.ii.1.A.1.a · A notified decision binds other VA field offices

Once VA issues the required decision notification, the rating agency’s conclusions based on the evidence then on file bind all VA field offices. A different regional office or reviewer does not acquire authority to redo that decision merely by disagreeing.

X.ii.1.A.1.b · Changing a binding decision requires legal authority

A binding determination may be revised only through the authorized Board, court or regulatory review mechanisms. Identify the applicable authority under 3.105, 3.2500 or 3.2600 before changing the prior result.

X.ii.1.A.1.c · Finality depends on the applicable review system

For decisions before February 19, 2019, use the legacy appeal-period or appellate-disposition rule. For decisions on or after that date, consider expiration of the available decision-review period or final judicial disposition when no further qualifying review option remains. Verify the actual decision and review history.

X.ii.1.A.1.d · Binding does not always mean finally adjudicated

An issue can have a binding notified decision while its appeal or decision-review period remains open. The manual treats that not-yet-finally-adjudicated claim as pending. Keep that distinction when reviewing continuous pursuit and authority to change the result.

X.ii.1.A.1.e · Board decisions have their own jurisdiction rules

A Board decision binds VBA. An RO cannot award a benefit denied by the Board on the same record without the required new and relevant evidence; the source addresses a supplemental claim within one year of the Board decision. Other available actions include court appeal and a motion to the Board under the applicable reconsideration rules.

A Board reconsideration motion is not a claim requiring a prescribed application form. Use the linked Board, court and CUE-jurisdiction procedures for the actual request. A Board decision in another person’s case is not a precedential rule for this Veteran.

X.ii.1.A.1.f · Match revision authority to the review lane

The table distinguishes legacy de novo review, other legacy review, no review request, supplemental claims and HLR. Legacy de novo review can revise on the same record under that authority, for CUE, or on new and material evidence. Without a timely de novo election, a difference of opinion on the same record requires the specified central approval.

With no review request, the table permits the applicable CUE or centrally approved difference-of-opinion authority. Supplemental review adds new and relevant evidence as a route. HLR uses the higher-level reviewer’s de novo authority and the table’s CUE or approved difference-of-opinion provisions. Do not mix the legacy new-and-material standard with supplemental new-and-relevant evidence or invent an earlier-effective-date route.

X.ii.1.A.2.a · Retain favorable findings across reviews

A favorable finding by a VA adjudicator or the Board binds later VA and Board adjudicators unless clear and unmistakable evidence rebuts it. The claimant does not need to reestablish an accepted fact just because the issue moves to a new reviewer.

X.ii.1.A.2.b · Rebutting a favorable finding differs from revising an award for CUE

Rebuttal requires clear and unmistakable contrary evidence. A record completely lacking plausible support for the favorable finding can satisfy that standard without proving that the benefit outcome would undebatably change. Ordinary disagreement about weight is insufficient.

Overturning the favorable finding alone does not require extra approval signatures. If that leads to a finding that the prior benefit award was CUE, the normal CUE requirements and signatures apply. Keep these two determinations separate.

X.ii.2.A.1.a · A decided issue needs an authorized review request

After decision notification, the decision binds VA and the evidentiary record closes. The available review mechanisms include a CUE allegation, a supplemental claim with new and relevant evidence, HLR or a Board appeal. Identify the actual request, available lane and jurisdiction before processing newly submitted material.

X.ii.2.A.1.b · Evidence by itself does not reopen the claim

CUE does not require a prescribed form. Supplemental review uses 20-0995 and HLR uses 20-0996; an NOD goes directly to the Board. Evidence without a required form or CUE allegation is generally handled as a request for application under II.iii.2.G.1 rather than as automatic readjudication.

X.ii.2.A.1.c · The review lane and timing determine Section 5103 notice

HLR does not require Section 5103 notice. Neither does a supplemental claim filed within one year of the prior decision notification. For a later supplemental claim, review the 20-0995 electronic-notice certification and other applicable exceptions before deciding whether a notice is required.

X.ii.2.A.1.d · Assistance begins with the substantially complete supplemental claim

VA’s duty to assist includes obtaining evidence that may help establish new and relevant evidence. Do not postpone all assistance until the claimant independently proves the NRE threshold. HLR instead uses a closed record without a new duty to assist, but its reviewer considers whether the earlier adjudication fulfilled that duty.

X.ii.2.A.1.e · A challenge to an earlier NRE finding is its own review issue

A claimant may timely choose an available review option to challenge a decision that evidence was not new and relevant. Limit that decision to the issue being reviewed and identify the original denial and notice, the evidence receipt, the NRE determination and its notice, and the submitted evidence in the evidence summary and reasons.

X.ii.2.A.2.a · Do not send duplicate notice when the exception is satisfied

For a supplemental claim within one year of prior-decision notification, no new Section 5103 notice is required. For a later claim, a checked certification that the claimant reviewed electronic Section 5103 notice can satisfy the requirement without another notice. Check any other applicable general or special-issue notice provision against the actual facts.

X.ii.2.A.2.b · A qualifying ITF can apply to a supplemental claim

The rule effective July 30, 2021 recognizes ITFs for qualifying supplemental claims after the court invalidated the exclusion. The supplemental claim must be substantially complete, be the first application for the same benefit type identified on the ITF, and arrive within one year of the ITF. Verify active/consumed status and the detailed ITF exceptions rather than choosing any earlier date in the folder.

X.ii.2.A.2.c · A timely ITF can preserve continuous pursuit

Under the rule effective July 30, 2021, an ITF received within one year of a decision notice can preserve continuous pursuit when followed by a qualifying complete supplemental claim, even if that completed claim arrives after the decision’s one-year anniversary. ITFs do not apply to HLR. Use the ITF qualification rules and actual dates together.

X.ii.2.A.2.d · Relevant evidence need not repair the prior reason for denial

New evidence was not previously part of the actual record before adjudicators. Relevant evidence tends to prove or disprove a matter at issue, including a previously unaddressed theory. New evidence confirming a fact previously found favorable is still relevant.

In the manual’s back-condition example, new treatment records show ongoing pain even though the earlier denial concerned nexus. Those records can make the application complete and justify a merits decision because they are relevant to the disability, despite not resolving nexus by themselves.

X.ii.2.A.2.e · Make the threshold determination before deciding the merits

A previously decided claim requires a conditional two-part decision: whether NRE warrants readjudication, and, if it does, whether the underlying benefit is granted or remains denied. Submitting or identifying potentially new evidence makes the supplemental application complete and requires a decision.

If the final evidence is duplicative, not new or not relevant, issue a threshold decision that evidence is insufficient for readjudication. If it is new and relevant, issue a merits decision. A negative NRE determination is not the same as declaring the application incomplete.

X.ii.2.A.2.f · An evaluation supplemental claim has no one-year filing prohibition

A Veteran may submit a supplemental claim on an evaluation more than a year after the prior decision. Process the complete claim under the supplemental rules; use 3.2500(h) for effective-date consequences. Do not reject it or automatically convert it to an increase merely because a year elapsed.

X.ii.2.A.2.g · An examination depends on missing findings, not the supplemental label

Review whether the new evidence shows an evaluation picture inconsistent with the assigned percentage or leaves another required medical question unanswered. An adequate private positive opinion with supporting rationale can be weighed and decided without routinely ordering another examination. Use the clarification and reconciliation rules for actual deficiencies or inconsistencies.

If development cannot determine examination need after reviewing the evidence, consult rating before ordering one. In the source’s back-strain example, new notes showing only the same pain already compensated by the 10-percent evaluation do not automatically require an examination.

X.ii.2.A.3.a · Determine continuous pursuit or finality before choosing the date rule

For the modernized review system, first decide whether this same issue was continuously pursued through available review options or whether the supplemental claim followed final adjudication. The claim label alone does not establish the effective-date framework.

X.ii.2.A.3.b · Continuous pursuit can preserve the initial claim basis

Timely successive available HLR, supplemental and Board review options can preserve continuous pursuit. The general effective date is then the initial claim receipt or when entitlement arose, whichever is later. The source also addresses qualifying supplemental claims following court decisions and specified dismissals, and a qualifying ITF can preserve the chain.

A more specific applicable 3.400 rule takes precedence. Continuous pursuit does not extend separate evidence deadlines for dependency or income. Verify the same issue and claimant, every review step and any dismissal stipulation rather than assuming every court disposition keeps all issues open.

X.ii.2.A.3.c · After finality, the supplemental filing usually supplies the earliest basis

When the supplemental claim follows final adjudication, 3.2500(h)(2) generally fixes the date according to when entitlement arose, no earlier than supplemental receipt. Review a qualifying ITF and any more specific applicable 3.400 provision before assigning a final date.

X.ii.2.A.3.d · Example: timely pursuit preserves the original application

In the IHD example, the original claim was received March 17, 2018 and denied on August 14, 2018 because the service event was not established. A timely March 1, 2019 HLR identified existing service evidence supporting herbicide exposure. With entitlement otherwise established and continuous pursuit preserved, the effective date is the original March 17, 2018 claim, not the later HLR request.

X.ii.2.A.3.e · Example: a later persuasive opinion does not automatically restore the original date

In the knee example, the September 17, 2017 denial became final before the March 1, 2019 supplemental claim. A persuasive new private nexus opinion supports the grant, but the example’s effective date is March 1, 2019. Winning the merits with better evidence does not by itself reopen the original filing date.

X.ii.2.A.3.f · Timely correction can preserve an incomplete supplemental filing

VA must tell the claimant and representative what is needed to complete an incomplete supplemental application. If the required information arrives within 60 days of that notice, the incomplete receipt can be preserved for potential effective-date purposes. Use the detailed incomplete-application controls and distinguish that preserved filing date from actual complete-claim receipt for establishment. The source’s older references to II.iii.2.B.1.e–f now correspond to the current completeness and correction topics in B.1.d–e.

III.i.2.C.1.a · A substantially complete claim triggers relevant Federal-record assistance

For an initial or supplemental claim that is substantially complete, VA makes reasonable efforts to obtain relevant Federal records. Review whether the identified records can help substantiate the claim, and obtain enough information to identify their source. Do not make assistance depend on the claimant first proving entitlement.

III.i.2.C.1.b · Federal records come from several different sources

Federal sources include military treatment, personnel, line-of-duty, inpatient and separately stored behavioral-health records; VA and VA-authorized non-VA treatment; Vet Centers; Social Security; Public Health Service; and Labor Department records. A normal STR packet does not necessarily contain the inpatient or mental health file. The separate source procedures determine the actual request and follow-up.

III.i.2.C.1.c · Continue Federal efforts until there is a supported stopping condition

Keep trying until the records are obtained or it is reasonably certain they do not exist or further attempts would be futile. Review the custodian response, known alternate locations and the required minimum efforts. An expired suspense or a fixed number of attempts is not, by itself, a futility finding.

III.i.2.C.1.d · Apply actual futility evidence and the STR certification exception

A custodian may confirm that records do not exist or are not held and no useful further search remains. The manual also recognizes a DD Form 2963 or its predecessor certification of available STRs, with specific exceptions and missing-record notice requirements. Apply the detailed current STR rules in III.ii.2.A, including its specific missing-treatment exception, and the fire-record procedure where applicable. Do not turn certification into a reason to ignore a separately held clinical or personnel record.

III.i.2.C.1.e · The request needs usable identifying information

The claimant must cooperate by providing enough information to locate the Federal records: the agency or custodian, approximate period and the condition or event involved. Stressor research needs enough searchable detail. Where a custodian requires an authorization, obtain one it can accept. Clarify the missing information rather than sending a request that cannot be searched.

III.i.2.C.2.a · Seek adequately identified relevant private records

Use reasonable efforts for relevant non-Federal records identified by the claimant or representative at any point during claim processing. Obtain necessary release forms or allow the claimant to supply the evidence. Fully Developed Claim procedures have their own handling rules; the identification of a private source must still be reviewed under the applicable procedure.

Clarify unclear or insufficient private or VA medical evidence when clarification could provide relevant information needed to decide the claim. If clarification is unnecessary, explain why. The source cites Savage; do not dismiss a useful clarification simply because the original report was private.

III.i.2.C.2.b · Ordinary private efforts include a follow-up and useful new leads

Ordinarily make an initial request and at least one follow-up. A response establishing that records do not exist or further requests would be futile can make another request unnecessary. If a response identifies another useful custodian, make the initial and follow-up efforts for that new source as needed. Apply the PMR procedure’s specific timing and exceptions when it governs the request.

III.i.2.C.2.c · A source may be identified in a statement or an examination report

Adequate identification can be as simple as information that relevant records exist and who holds them; it need not arrive only on a release form. The identification must originate with the claimant or representative, including an application, statement, release form, or medical/examination report transcribing the Veteran’s description of private treatment.

III.i.2.C.2.d · Another person’s records require a disclosure and reasonable-efforts review

The records must be adequately identified, relevant and potentially helpful, and VA must be legally permitted to disclose their relevant portions to this claimant. Possessing the records is not itself permission to disclose them. Apply the Privacy Act and 38 U.S.C. 5701 and 7332; generally VA cannot consider material that cannot be disclosed to the claimant.

Assess whether seeking consent is reasonable in this case: consider the other person’s interests, likelihood of consent, actual basis to believe the records exist, usefulness and possible conflict or harm to safety, health or rights. An alleged assailant’s adverse interest can make a consent request unreasonable. A nonadverse fellow service member whose records could corroborate a shared event can present a reasonable opportunity for consent. Neither example is an automatic rule for every case. The duty to assist generally does not require obtaining a court order.

III.i.2.C.3.a · Notify the claimant when private records cannot be obtained

The notice identifies the unavailable records, explains VA’s efforts, states what VA will do next, including processing on the available record, and explains the claimant’s ultimate responsibility to supply the evidence. It can accompany the final request. Follow the specific PMR procedure’s notice and decision evidence-list requirements where applicable.

III.i.2.C.3.b · Federal-record unavailability generally needs a final letter

After the proper Federal stopping condition is established, send the required final notice using III.ii.1.A. Identify the missing records, efforts, further claim action and claimant responsibility. Check the actual source-specific exceptions, such as insufficient information to request fire reconstruction. A supported unavailability finding does not decide whether the claimant is entitled to benefits.

III.i.2.E.1.a · Relevant records relate to the claim and can reasonably help it

For duty-to-assist purposes, records must relate to the disability or injury being claimed and have a reasonable possibility of helping substantiate the claim. The same principles apply to private and Federal records. For example, headache treatment identified during an ankle-increase claim is not relevant merely because it is medical evidence. There must be a specific reason to believe the records could contain helpful information; the source discusses Golz and Raugust.

III.i.2.E.1.b · Consider the possible benefit and effective date in this case

There is no universal list of relevant and irrelevant records. Often the claimant’s description permits a relevance assessment without obtaining the records first. Ask whether the records could support the benefit, a higher evaluation or an earlier effective date, including a liberalizing-law date. If doubt remains and the records could support an earlier effective date, obtain them.

III.i.2.E.1.c · An SSA decision about an unrelated condition may not establish relevance

The source’s Golz example involves a PTSD claim and an SSA award based solely on back and leg pain after an injury, with no mental-health information or specific allegation connecting the SSA material to PTSD. Those facts do not establish relevance. This is not a blanket rule that SSA records are unnecessary in mental-health claims; review the actual SSA basis and the claimant’s explanation.

III.i.2.E.1.d · The examples turn on whether any additional benefit could result

Old hypothyroid treatment may not help a decades-later increase claim when it cannot establish a higher evaluation or earlier date. Missing dental records ordinarily do not help a low-back claim. Older diabetes records need not be obtained where the benefit is already supported and those records cannot improve the evaluation or date; the reason is the absence of a possible added benefit, not simply that they are old.

The source also illustrates other benefits: a death certificate may already establish the necessary link to SC diabetes; sufficient pension evidence may make another record unable to increase the benefit; and liver-failure records may not reasonably connect death to SC hearing loss without a specific reason they would help. These examples retain their particular facts. Do not use them to dismiss a claimant’s specific explanation or to decide an unrelated benefit automatically.

III.i.2.E.1.e · Military clinical records must be obtained for SC mental-disorder claims

For an SC mental-disorder claim, all clinical records from military service are considered relevant and must be obtained. They can be stored separately from the ordinary STRs. Use the clinical request and locating rules in III.ii.2.A and C; the source cites Moore.

III.i.2.E.1.f · Document nonrelevance and carry it to the decision maker

A development processor who finds identified records irrelevant must add a VBMS note identifying the facility or physician and that the records were not requested because they are not relevant, and associate it with the claim. Preserve the actual case-specific basis.

The rating decision maker reviews electronic notes as well as documents. If agreeing, the decision maker puts the statement into the decision evidence text under the specified VBMS-R evidence function. If disagreeing, the decision maker obtains or directs development for the records. In legacy appeals, the corresponding statement belongs in the Evidence section of the SOC or SSOC.

III.i.2.D.1.a · Use the letter tools for written evidence requests

Use available automated correspondence tools to create the evidence request. The manual also encourages appropriate telephone, email and electronic development; the fact that a letter template exists does not make a generic written request the right first action in every case.

III.i.2.D.1.b · Explain the ordinary 30-day response and one-year evidence periods

Ordinarily ask for the evidence within 30 days and explain that VA may decide from the existing record if it does not arrive. Also explain that the claimant has one year from the request to submit evidence or information to substantiate the claim. The ordinary processing response period does not erase that one-year period.

III.i.2.D.1.c · Clarify an unclear issue without inventing an evidence suspense

First determine whether the application is substantially complete. If it is not, use II.iii.1.C.2.b’s incomplete-application procedure. If it is complete but the issue needs clarification, contact the claimant and authorized representative, using the permitted telephone documentation and encrypted representative-email methods. Save the correspondence and continue processing. This clarification does not carry a notification letter or response period. The source’s example is a claimed knee disability without right/left identification; separate MST exceptions still apply.

III.i.2.D.1.d · Use appropriate telephone and electronic development

Attempt telephone contact before written development for information that can appropriately be obtained verbally. Examples include treatment information, identifiers, contact details, clarification, employment, dependency and relevant income information. Follow VA privacy and information-security rules. Treat emailed or electronically submitted evidence as authentic unless there is a specific reason to question its source, and apply the normal correspondence handling rules. The source links separate dependency and electronic-communication procedures.

III.i.2.D.1.e · Record successful and unsuccessful calls differently

Summarize information from a successful claimant or authorized-representative call on VA Form 27-0820. Record an unsuccessful contact attempt in a permanent note. The note should let a later processor understand what contact occurred and what information remains needed.

III.i.2.D.1.f · Telephone information can affect payments only with the required safeguards

The receiving employee must identify themself as authorized to receive the information, verify the caller as the beneficiary or fiduciary using VA-record information, and tell the caller that the information will be used to calculate benefits. Document the actual information, call date, caller, verification steps, warning and executing employee’s identification and valid signature on 27-0820. Keep the form in the folder and send a copy to the representative when applicable.

A corporate-record ITF entry and the specified procedures for completing 21-686c or 21-674 on a beneficiary’s behalf have exceptions to a separate 27-0820. Properly obtained telephone information can permit contemporaneous notice of an authorized adjustment. Without the safeguards or qualifying signed written notice, advance notice of an intended adverse action is required. An accepted beneficiary/fiduciary electronic submission can serve as written notice. Apply the actual award and due-process authorities; a third-party telephone allegation is not the beneficiary/fiduciary exception.

III.i.2.D.1.g · Identify relied-upon telephone evidence in the decision notice

If a decision uses evidence obtained by telephone, its notice must identify the date of the contact and the person who supplied the information. The call record and the decision’s evidence explanation serve different purposes; retaining 27-0820 alone does not satisfy this notice requirement.

III.i.2.D.1.h · Unreadable media gets a specific 15-day replacement request

Use the Special Media Return Letter when submitted media cannot be read because of damage or corruption. If the letter is unavailable, use the source’s exact replacement text identifying the media and receipt date, explaining the failure and return, requesting readable copies in 15 days, explaining decision on the existing record for nonresponse and requesting name/file number on resubmission. Set every letter response reference to 15 days. Set the claim-level reason to the damaged-media development reason and both claim and tracked-item suspense to 15 days from the notice.

III.i.2.D.2.a · Thirty days is the ordinary rule, with specific exceptions

Allow 30 days for an evidence response unless a more specific policy or regulation sets another period. Use the actual request and event date; an unrelated suspense creation date does not start every deadline. Erroneous or unnecessary development has a separate nullification rule.

III.i.2.D.2.b · Route the response or completed nonresponse review to the responsible activity

When evidence arrives, or the ordinary response period ends without it, refer to the authorization or rating activity responsible for deciding the benefit. Authorization handles its assigned denial processing and notice responsibilities. If any medical evidence was obtained in connection with the claim, rating must determine whether it supports an award. Do not deny before required private-record assistance is complete, and do not let claimant nonresponse excuse remaining source-specific development.

III.i.2.D.2.c · A supported partial award need not wait for all requested evidence

If some evidence supports a partial award, action can occur before the ordinary response period ends. Keep the current EP running and issue proper decision notice, explaining that remaining aspects are deferred while the other evidence is awaited. At the end of the response period, apply the responsible-activity review to the remaining benefit; the early partial award does not close its development.

III.i.2.D.2.d · Extend for new issues, omitted essential evidence or a supported request

Extend the response period if a response raises new issues needing resolution, the original development failed to request essential evidence, or the claimant asks for more time while making an honest effort to obtain it. Keep EP control with an accurate date of claim while development remains pending. It is improper to deny while simultaneously developing evidence to support the claim.

III.i.2.D.2.e · An extension does not reset the statutory period or award rules

Extending the ordinary response period does not alter the one-year statutory evidence-submission limit or the rules for the effective date of a later award. Record the actual extended response date while preserving the original claim and notice history.

III.i.2.D.2.f · Returned mail alone does not always extend the ordinary period

If a request for essential evidence went to the correct last known address and no newer address can be found, do not extend the ordinary 30 days solely because the letter was returned undeliverable. Apply II.i.2.C.6.d’s returned-mail procedure. First distinguish that situation from a misaddressed letter or an available updated address that requires corrective action.

III.i.2.D.2.g · Nullify only a verified erroneous or unnecessary request

A processor can nullify the response period for development determined erroneous or unnecessary and take the next authorized action, including decision where appropriate. The rating decision or decision notice must explain that nullification. The source gives examples involving a September 2018-or-later dependency form and an unnecessary Section 5103 notice for a qualifying supplemental claim. Check their actual exceptions; a desire to finish faster is not a nullification basis.

III.i.2.D.3.a · Use a form that contains the required certification

Where an affidavit or certification is required, an appropriate VA form containing certification can satisfy it. Enclose that form when asking for the evidence. The dependency application is the source’s example of a form with a truthfulness certification above the signature.

III.i.2.D.3.b · A properly signed alternative can also certify evidence

Where a prescribed standard claim form is not required for that information, VA accepts a signed 21-4138 or 21-10210, or another signed written communication with appropriate certification language. This evidence-certification flexibility does not waive a prescribed claim-form requirement that actually applies.

III.i.2.D.3.c · SC statements need an oath, affirmation or proper certification

Statements submitted by or for the claimant to establish SC must be sworn, affirmed or certified under 38 CFR 3.200. The exact language differs: a records certification confirms the material is a true transcript of the person’s records, while a factual statement certifies truth to the best of the person’s knowledge and belief. Use the original block’s exact wording when preparing a certification.

III.i.2.D.3.d · Rating determines whether an uncertified SC statement is needed

Refer an uncertified or unsworn SC statement to rating to decide whether it is required to establish SC. If needed, obtain certification under the return-copy procedure. Do not independently reject the statement or assume that every uncertified submission requires new development.

III.i.2.D.3.e · Rating can waive certification when other evidence establishes SC

Rating can waive certification if it can establish SC using other evidence without considering the uncertified statement. The waiver rests on that actual evidentiary basis, not simply the statement’s age or the inconvenience of getting it signed.

III.i.2.D.3.f · Keep the original and return a copy for certification

When rating finds certification necessary, photocopy the statement, place the source’s exact certification wording and a signature line on the copy, and send the copy to its author. Explain that failure to certify within 30 days may lead to denial. Retain the original in the folder and control the actual response.

III.i.2.D.4.a · VA can ask whether an eligibility fact still exists

VA may require a beneficiary to certify that a fact supporting eligibility or continued entitlement remains true, under 38 CFR 3.652. Identify the actual eligibility factor and evidence suggesting it changed. This is distinct from a new medical judgment about a disability evaluation.

III.i.2.D.4.b · Use proposed notice, a 60-day response and a 65-day control

Send proposed adverse-action notice requesting certification and explaining possible discontinuance if it is not supplied in 60 days. Use EP 600 except that income verification match cases do not get a separate EP 600. Set suspense at 65 days for mail handling and do not adjust before that period expires. Apply the linked proposed-action and benefit-specific rules.

A sufficient response determines whether the award should continue, change or stop, with proper decision notice. For no response after the required opportunity, the adjustment is effective the first of the month after the record last confirmed the eligibility fact; send the appropriate decision notice. Resolve actual extensions, hearing protections and incomplete or late evidence under their governing rules rather than treating the 65-day display as automatic authority.

III.i.2.D.4.c · The example uses the last confirmation, not the new allegation date

The source’s example is a childless surviving spouse receiving pension, with possible remarriage and a last marital-status confirmation dated November 12, 2004. VA sends the proposed certification notice February 11, 2010. Under the stated nonresponse facts, discontinuance is based on December 1, 2004, the month after the last confirmation. This illustrates the date rule; it does not mean that every allegation of a changed fact proves the fact or authorizes an immediate adjustment.

III.i.2.D.5.a · Genuine public-document copies are generally acceptable

When a signed claimant statement is insufficient, accept a public-document copy or abstract if it is genuine and unaltered. Marriage, birth and death certificates are examples. If necessary, request a copy certified by the records custodian’s signature and official seal. Apply the underlying benefit’s evidence requirements.

III.i.2.D.5.b · Service-proof copies must come from a service-department original

The original military-service document must have been issued by the service department. A public custodian can certify a true copy; a properly trained accredited representative can apply the prescribed certification, signature and date; or a claimant/representative-submitted copy can be accepted when examination shows it is genuine and unaltered. Check the source’s exact representative certification text and III.i.1.B for whether the document actually establishes the needed service facts.

III.i.2.D.5.c · Genuine STR copies can be used for rating

STR photocopies are acceptable for rating if review establishes that they are genuine and free from alteration. Acceptability of the copy is separate from whether the collection covers the relevant service and treatment periods or supplies all evidence needed for the issue.

II.i.2.B.1.a · Record when VA actually received the document

Incoming documents need receipt evidence. ROs use black electronic stamps; out-based locations use red electronic/manual stamps identifying the office, or interim annotations with employee signature, office details, date and time. Outreach uses the prescribed annotations where an approved electronic method is unavailable. Scanning vendors date the converted image.

Authorized congressional correspondence uses the email date and direct upload. Direct electronic documents do not need printing merely to stamp them: accurately enter first VA possession in VBMS. Under the D2D agreement, a failed claim submission or one without a confirmation ID is not received; a successful resubmission supplies its receipt date. Predischarge and IDES have additional linked procedures.

II.i.2.B.1.b · Recover a missing receipt stamp without inventing certainty

If received today, apply an official stamp. For a supported earlier receipt, handwrite that date; if unknown, write the best estimate and identify it as an estimate. Handwritten entries need RO name/number, employee signature, current date and time. Accept otherwise documented receipt absent fraud or an apparent discrepancy.

A fax received-date is acceptable without printing/restamping. For an authorized email mailbox, use the electronically recorded sent date and upload the email. Unsolicited claims mail to an individual employee or unauthorized mailbox is not accepted there; provide a courtesy reply directing Centralized Mail submission. Managers can direct additional RO-receipt annotations during unusual internal delays.

II.i.2.B.1.c · Stamp evidence without obscuring it

Prefer the lower-right front corner. Stamp the first page of forms, claimant correspondence and representative cover sheets, and the first and last pages of medical evidence. Keep a mail batch together and separately date the relevant items; never cover useful content with a stamp.

II.i.2.B.1.d · Centralized Mail uses the earliest official receipt

Compare the RO stamp before scanning, the vendor date for directly received mail, and dates on reports of contact or faxes. The portal usually reflects the earliest receipt, but if an earlier supported date is found, correct VBMS document properties.

II.i.2.B.1.e · Apply the narrow historical Newnan mail-delay exception

This addresses mail sent to Newnan between January 25 and February 26, 2016. The envelope must be addressed to Newnan, lack a Newnan stamp and carry a Janesville stamp. Mail addressed to Janesville, faxed to Newnan or submitted through SEP/eBenefits is excluded. If the criteria fail, use the indicated stamp.

For qualifying mail use its postmark. Without a postmark, use the application signature date only if after January 25, 2016. If no usable signature/other identifying date exists or it was signed on/before that date, use January 25, 2016. Retain the packet evidence supporting the exception.

II.i.2.B.1.f · Original legal certificates are not routinely returned

VA no longer requires returning original court papers or marriage, birth, death and discharge certificates. Originals generally are not required to process a claim, and there is no way to retrieve them once shipped to the scanning vendor.

II.i.2.B.2.a · A mark or thumbprint needs a qualifying witness

Accept an X or thumbprint when witnessed by two people who give their addresses, or by one VA employee, VSO representative, attorney, accredited agent, notary or person authorized to administer oaths. Check separate representative-appointment requirements when relevant.

II.i.2.B.2.b · Pencil signatures are acceptable

A signature or X mark made in pencil can be accepted. A pencil X still needs the qualifying witness required by the mark/thumbprint rule.

II.i.2.B.2.c · Poor scan quality alone does not justify another signature

Interpret a poor-quality scanned signature as belonging to the proper claimant. Do not develop for a duplicate solely because the scan quality is low; an actual fraud or authenticity concern is a different question.

II.i.2.B.2.d · Copies of wet signatures can be accepted

A faxed or photocopied version of an original wet signature is acceptable for VA purposes. Do not confuse this with a requirement for the claimant to provide a new original.

II.i.2.B.2.e · An authorized employee can use official typed identification

Where authority exists for a VA employee to complete the form for a claimant, or an official employee signature is otherwise required, a typed name, station number and position title may replace a wet or digital signature. This rule supplies the signature format; it does not create authority to sign every form.

II.i.2.B.2.f · Electronic and digital signatures are different formats

A digital signature uses encrypted code to verify source and document integrity. An electronic signature is affixed to an electronic document, including signature-pad input or a typed/written computer-generated signature. A scanned/faxed wet signature is a transmission of a wet signature and is separately acceptable.

II.i.2.B.2.g · Accept electronic signatures unless there is clear fraud or inauthenticity

Electronic/digital signatures and signature images on claims, review requests, legacy appeals and associated forms are acceptable absent clear fraud or inauthenticity. For example, a signature dated after documented death presents a real discrepancy. Use the fraud procedure if indicated and separately check representative authority or an unsigned application.

II.i.2.B.2.h · The acceptance policy has a June 20, 2017 transition

The policy covers claims pending on June 20, 2017, previously received claims material still pending and not already properly rejected, timely requests to review formerly rejected claims, and claims/material received from that date forward. A prior proper rejection needs the specific review rule, not automatic reopening.

II.i.2.B.2.i · A timely review request can cure a formerly rejected electronic signature

For a claim properly rejected under former signature rules, a review request within one year of receipt of that rejected claim is enough to complete it. Establish the proper EP with the review-request receipt as its control date; any award uses the prior rejected claim receipt as the date basis. Outside that year, this exception does not revise the rejection; a complete signed prescribed claim is required.

For a properly rejected non-claim form, accept its signature if the associated claim remains pending or a subsequent legacy appeal is received. Consider the material with that pending claim/appeal.

II.i.2.B.2.j · A cured claim can have different control and benefit-date bases

In the source example, the February 21, 2017 electronic claim was properly rejected and review requested June 21, 2017. The timely request completes the claim without another signed form: EP control uses June 21 while the potential award-date basis remains February 21.

II.i.2.B.2.k · A rejected supporting form can be used in a still-pending claim

The example has a pending January 2017 claim with a February 2017 IU form rejected for its electronic signature. Because the claim remains pending, accept that IU form and consider it during development and decision without demanding another signature solely under the former policy.

II.i.2.B.3.a · Alternate signatures are for specified claimant limitations

An alternate signature may be accepted for a claimant under 18, physically unable to sign, or unable mentally to supply substantially accurate information or certify the form as true and complete. A relative signing is not enough by itself; verify both claimant eligibility and signer authority.

II.i.2.B.3.b · The signer must have a qualifying relationship or authority

The signer must be a court-appointed representative, person responsible for care (including a spouse/relative), durable-POA agent/attorney-in-fact, or manager/principal officer of the caring institution.

Where the record documents the relevant competency finding, accept the signature of the court-appointed guardian, court-appointed fiduciary with incompetency finding, or VA-appointed fiduciary without alternate-signer development under this procedure.

II.i.2.B.3.c · Accept supported certification without unnecessary repeat development

Accept a satisfactorily completed form certification or a completed 21-0972 submitted with an eligible listed form. A previously satisfactory certification from that signer may support eligible later forms/evidence while the claimant and signer still qualify and no discrepancy exists. Check the listed forms and submission sequence.

An application certification permits that signer to submit supporting evidence for that pending claim until it closes or the claimant no longer qualifies. It is not blanket authority for new applications after closure. Nonlisted evidence leading to adverse action requires the applicable notice/due-process review. Medical providers may have additional legal signature requirements; develop if notified the signature is insufficient. Prescribed-form 5103 notice received by an appropriate alternate signer need not be duplicated to the claimant.

II.i.2.B.3.d · Use the correct letter when authority is unclear or conflicting

For an application, send the alternate signer an Incomplete Application letter, 21-0972 and the sample explanatory language, with a copy to the claimant. For another form listed on 21-0972, use the applicable evidence-development letter with the same enclosure/language and copy. For other items, obtain the claimant signature as needed under that document’s own procedure.

II.i.2.B.3.e · Missing application certification may require clarification

If the application lacks required alternate-signer certification and the evidence does not clearly establish that the alternate signer is appropriate, send the alternate signer an Incomplete Application letter and 21-0972 with the source’s explanatory language, copying the claimant.

II.i.2.B.3.f · Explain why alternate-signer information is needed

The prescribed sample asks for 21-0972 to establish why someone else signed. It describes the three qualifying claimant circumstances and four signer categories. Use it when certification and an ascertainable authority basis are missing, or evidence of authority is conflicting. Read the original for the exact outgoing letter language.

II.i.2.B.4.a · Old versions have limited acceptance exceptions

Normally use the current prescribed form. Accept an outdated version generated by a VA form-generating website/system regardless of submission date; the current interim rule also accepts outdated versions submitted by authorized VSOs on paper or electronically. Other senders may use the old version through the last day of the month 12 months after revision.

For accepted old versions, seek information newly collected by the current form only if needed to process the claim or otherwise required. An old claim form outside an exception, or an otherwise incomplete form, follows incomplete-application handling.

II.i.2.B.4.b · Use the revision date, not the issue date

Check the revision month/year printed near the form number or the REVISION DATE on the VA Forms Website/Publication Index. ISSUE DATE does not determine the current version or old-version acceptance period. The current form normally identifies the superseded version.

II.i.2.B.4.c · Acceptance extends through the whole corresponding month

In the source example, a February 2016 form submitted August 2018 was superseded by a March 2018 revision. It remained acceptable through March 2019 under the 12-month rule, so the otherwise valid claim could proceed.

II.i.2.B.4.d · Reject the version using the application or evidence procedure

For an unestablished claim, use incomplete-application handling and modify the letter to require the proper current version. If already incorrectly established, use II.iii.2.E. For a non-claim form, use Outdated Form—Non-claim and allow 30 days for the correct version. Do not replace an application’s preservation period with this supporting-form deadline.

II.i.2.B.4.e · Discontinued forms do not get the outdated-version exceptions

A discontinued form stops being usable on discontinuance; the VSO/system and 12-month rules do not extend it. For claim forms, use the appropriate incomplete-application or incorrectly-established-claim procedure and require the proper form. For non-claim forms, tailor the outdated-form letter with 30 days for a replacement where applicable, or assess evidentiary value.

The example discontinued 21-526 and 21-526b effective February 19, 2019. A claim submitted on those forms from that date is not accepted as a claim; do not confuse the old 21-526b title with the current supplemental-review form.

II.iii.2.A.1.a · An ITF reserves a potential claim-date placeholder

An ITF can be communicated on 21-0966, through the national call center, by initiating an application on a VA claims website, or to an RO employee by phone/in person. It is not itself a completed benefit claim. Historical informal claims have separate rules.

II.iii.2.A.1.b · Identify the claimant and benefit and check the required signature

The communication must identify the Veteran and, when different, the claimant, and specify the general benefit. A written ITF must be on 21-0966 signed by the claimant, VSO, recognized POA or a qualifying alternate signer with 21-0972. Available accompanying information can establish identity; only benefit and signature sections need completion if identity is otherwise established. If claimant identification is blank, assume the claimant is the Veteran.

Website initiation itself can qualify. For a call-center claimant without a corporate record, the employee completes, signs and submits 21-0966. Field Examiners follow FPM I.2.C.3.o. Check alternate-signer, representative and old-form requirements as applicable.

II.iii.2.A.1.c · A timely complete claim can use the ITF date

A complete claim within one year may use the ITF as a claim-date placeholder when all other conditions are met. Other effective-date rules, including liberalizing-law and ordinary entitlement rules, may operate from that placeholder. It is not an automatic grant or universal effective date.

II.iii.2.A.1.d · An ITF ends when consumed or its period expires

The ITF is active until the earlier of a substantially complete same-benefit application or the end of its one-year period, subject to the detailed same-day rules. A later claim cannot reuse an ITF already associated with a prior claim just because it arrives within that year. After consumption, another ITF can become active even while the first claim remains pending. Incomplete claims and erroneous establishment need separate correction review.

II.iii.2.A.1.e · The benefit must match

A pension ITF cannot support compensation, or vice versa. A survivor choosing compensation or pension rather than survivor benefits has an incomplete ITF, requiring the incomplete-ITF procedure.

II.iii.2.A.1.f · Compensation and pension elections create separate ITFs

If both boxes are selected, each benefit has its own active ITF until that benefit’s claim arrives or the period expires. Verify the system did not consume the wrong benefit’s ITF due to an EP or programming issue.

II.iii.2.A.1.g · A duplicate does not restart the period

A later same-benefit ITF received while an earlier one remains active is duplicate. It has no new entitlement effect and does not extend the earlier deadline.

II.iii.2.A.1.h · An earlier active ITF can cover multiple claims received together

Apply a qualifying active ITF to all qualifying same-benefit claims received on the same day. The example applies a June ITF to a mailed supplemental claim and online initial claim both received in September on the same date. This is distinct from an ITF first received on the same day as the claim, which needs the submission-method rules.

II.iii.2.A.1.i · Withdrawal does not make the ITF reusable

A successfully withdrawn claim keeps its associated ITF; it cannot move to another claim. If the withdrawal is successfully retracted, the ITF remains with the restored claim for its effective-date review.

II.iii.2.A.1.j · Active-duty ITFs have limited effect

An ITF just before discharge generally adds nothing because of the postdischarge effective-date rule. Unusual multiple brief active-duty periods may make an ITF relevant. Benefits cannot be paid for active-service periods, regardless of the ITF.

II.iii.2.A.1.k · Not every benefit or review action uses an ITF

ITFs apply to compensation, pension, survivor pension and DIC. They do not apply to dependency, ancillary benefits, HLR, duplicate claims or CUE. The former exclusion of supplemental claims was invalidated: supplemental claims not finally adjudicated on or after July 30, 2021 can use an ITF. Apply the linked supplemental and continuous-pursuit rules.

II.iii.2.A.1.l · Record the ITF and ensure acknowledgment

Corporate entry triggers Hines notice of receipt date, benefit, required application and filing period. If notified the automatic letter could not be generated, manually create Active ITF Notification.

II.iii.2.A.2.a · Different receipt channels update the record differently

Website/SEP initiation automatically transfers data with no 21-0966; D2D submission transfers the ITF and uploads that form. Call-center CRM updates the record unless none exists, when the employee signs 21-0966 and routes to IPC. The station-of-origin IPC manually enters received forms; an RO employee enters an ITF communicated directly, and Field Examiners use their FPM procedure. Check BIRLS and VBMS profile requirements before entry.

II.iii.2.A.2.b · A telephone ITF needs identity and authorization

Verify identity in VA systems; develop by letter if it cannot be established. Explain that benefit claims require prescribed forms and check existing same-benefit ITFs. If one is active, explain its date, correct forms, deadline and filing methods; no additional ITF action is needed. Otherwise explain the placeholder and obtain authorization before entering one. Without authorization, treat the conversation as a request for application and explain forms, filing methods and receipt-date basis.

II.iii.2.A.2.c · Create a missing BIRLS record without creating a duplicate

First confirm no BIRLS record exists. An authorized user adds it in Share using available identification from 21-0966; service-data fields are not necessary for this step. Open the VBMS profile, update the claimant address using Edit Veteran and record the ITF through the current user-guide steps.

II.iii.2.A.2.d · Look at all ITFs, not only paper forms

Electronically initiated and directly communicated ITFs may have no 21-0966. Open the VBMS profile, select INTENT TO FILE and choose All in Status. Compare entries and Hines letters with the eFolder to find the correct ITF.

II.iii.2.A.2.e · Understand every status before relying on it

Active means an adequate ITF remains available; Duplicate means a same-benefit ITF arrived during another’s active period; Incomplete means missing required elements; Expired means no timely complete application; Claim Received means a qualifying claim consumed the ITF; Canceled means an erroneous entry was canceled with a reason. Only one same-benefit ITF can be active at a time. A new ITF after consumption is not duplicate merely because the associated claim is still pending.

II.iii.2.A.2.f · Website same-day processing depends on event order

Starting and submitting a website application the same day consumes the ITF it created if there was no earlier active same-benefit ITF. If one existed, that earlier ITF is consumed and the new initiation is duplicate. If the claimant starts another application after submitting the completed one that day, the later initiation creates a new Active ITF until a later qualifying submission. The source examples distinguish these sequences even though dates match.

II.iii.2.A.2.g · Non-website same-day receipt can leave an ITF active

An ITF received on the same day as an application submitted by means other than a VA claims website remains active for a subsequent claim. No extra claimant development is required solely because of same-day receipt; verify the system reflects the proper status and separately consider any earlier active/duplicate ITF.

II.iii.2.A.3.a · An incomplete ITF does not preserve its first receipt date

Before a subsequent claim arrives, route an unidentifiable ITF through unidentifiable-mail handling. For an identifiable claimant with no benefit election, attempt telephone clarification and document attempts; enter the completed or incomplete information according to the result. Enter an identifiable unsigned form as incomplete. Later completion uses receipt of the completing information, not the original incomplete ITF date. EP 400 tracking before April 2015 is historical.

II.iii.2.A.3.b · The incomplete acknowledgment explains what is missing

Entry generates a Hines letter saying why the form is not an acceptable ITF and what is needed for a complete ITF and/or benefit application. If notified generation failed or the address was wrong, manually create Application or Form - Incomplete, Unclear, or Outdated. Check the next block if a subsequent claim arrived before acknowledgment.

II.iii.2.A.3.c · A later claim before acknowledgment changes the letter process

When the subsequent claim arrives before the incomplete-ITF acknowledgment was sent, do not enter the incomplete ITF and trigger that automatic letter. Instead, explain directly through Application or Form - Incomplete, Unclear, or Outdated that the incomplete ITF cannot be used with the current claim. Its original date cannot establish a potential effective date.

II.iii.2.A.4.a · Correct consumption by a claim that cannot use an ITF

When the subsequent benefit does not use an ITF, verify that the corporate record leaves it active when appropriate. Establishment or a system status alone does not prove valid consumption.

II.iii.2.A.4.b · Correction authority changes at the daily batch run

Validate ITF data against available source information. Same-day correction before the evening batch follows the regular-user rules; after the run begins or on another day, use the later-correction procedure. Direct employee transcription into CRM/corporate records needs no separate 21-0966 or 27-0820 and no comparison with nonexistent duplicate documentation.

II.iii.2.A.4.c · Regular-user editing and cancellation are limited

Before the creation-day batch, a user permitted to add ITFs can edit/cancel eligible entries. Website-origin ITFs cannot be edited or canceled in VBMS through this route. Claim Received and Canceled entries cannot be canceled. Only Active entries may be edited, and only Benefit Sought/Received Date; changing benefit is prohibited if another ITF exists for the other benefit. Canceled entries stay visible; cancellation before that first batch prevents the letter.

II.iii.2.A.4.d · Later corrections require a Super Supervisor or service desk

RO editing is unavailable after the creation-day batch begins. Only Super Supervisors can cancel later. Refer needed corrections for permitted cancellation and accurate re-establishment; if that cannot be accomplished, refer through YourIT to the National Service Desk Solution Center.

II.iii.2.A.4.e · Later cancellation needs a separate explanation to the claimant

After creation day, the claimant has already received expiration correspondence and cancellation generates no automatic letter. The Super Supervisor/designee explains the error/correction by phone or uses Application or Form - Incomplete, Unclear, or Outdated if phone notification is not possible. Tailor the explanation when cancellation was only to correct and re-establish an ITF. The source prints this heading with a lowercase subpart letter; it is the same numbered block.

II.iii.2.A.4.f · Apply workday rules even when the system says expired

Under 3.110, exclude the first day, include the last, and allow the next workday when expiration falls on a weekend or holiday. The source examples accept a Monday after a weekend anniversary and the anniversary day itself. VBMS and effective-date tools do not fully apply this adjustment. The ITF screen gives February 29 entries a 366-day response period; verify the legal deadline rather than relying only on system status.

II.iii.2.A.4.g · Programming incidents need their actual special guidance

Both manual and electronic ITFs can be affected by receipt-date programming errors. VA issues incident-specific instructions, such as the August 2023 receipt-date exception. Verify the affected population and actual guidance before changing dates.

II.iii.2.A.4.h · Near-midnight dates may need time-zone review

VBMS and the corporate database use Eastern and Central servers. Compare the ITF and claim timestamps when near-midnight submissions suggest a time-zone discrepancy. Use the authorized correction procedure for a supported error; do not shift every electronic date automatically.

II.iii.3.A.1.a · Choose the correct establishment system

VBMS establishes initial compensation, pension/survivor and fiduciary claimant cases and most claims with an existing VBMS record. Share exceptions include claimant organizations other than state cemeteries and specified legacy-appeal appellants who are not the Veteran’s child, spouse or parent. Do not assume every fiduciary case belongs in Share.

II.iii.3.A.1.b · Check identity, folders and system eligibility before establishment

Look for a prior claims file number, current folder location and paper scanning need, VBMS exclusions and the appropriate establishment system. A benefit claim requires a substantially complete application. Before establishing a predischarge claim, update current branch and release-from-active-duty data in VBMS.

II.iii.3.A.1.c · Select initial rating EPs from history and contention count

Check Corporate Inquiry Award/Rating history. If there is a prior rating, identify previously denied issues; send the appropriate application request unless a proper 20-0995 was received, which routes to the DROC mail queue under M21-5. If all issues were denied before, stop this table.

For remaining appropriate initial-control work, check BIRLS INACTIVE COMP & PEN diagnostic entries, entitlement code and termination/disallowance reason. Any entry leads to the 020 series. No entries leads to 110 for seven or fewer contentions or 010 for eight or more. Do not substitute absence of a current award for this history review, and verify the actual label/modifier in Appendix B.

II.iii.3.A.1.d · Establish or update the VBMS claim and its evidence

Verify identity/contact/open claims and use New Claim for appropriate establishment. If a rating claim is already pending, update contentions/evidence instead; use Edit Veteran for contact changes. Complete required and applicable optional Claim Information fields. The 21-526EZ notice question may generate 5103 notice which must be sent; follow the specific contentions instructions.

Annotate paper with EP, establishment date and initials; electronic annotation is not required but a VBMS note is recommended. Complete Manage Evidence and each unsolicited mail packet. Keep receipt and claim-control facts accurate and apply the actual special-issue/flash procedures.

II.iii.3.A.1.e · Share establishment still needs complete control and document review

Check for an existing BIRLS record before adding one. Complete claim/benefit/payee/type and identity fields, the proper modifier, section/unit, POA and related claim information. Use earliest VA receipt, including scanning/vendor and VA website receipt, for the claim date where applicable. The table’s suspense is 15 days from current establishment, an administrative control. Leave Suppress Acknowledgment Letter deselected.

Create the control and required flashes, use the VBMS Claim Established in Share process and enter contentions/evidence. Annotate paper or retain the electronic note and complete scanning. Review VACOLS for active appeals. The source contains the detailed field-by-field transactions; a substantially complete application remains necessary.

II.iii.3.A.2.a · A hearing request needs the right existing control and a prompt tracked item

For a pending or unestablished legacy appeal, use/establish EP 170 and Local Hearing on each affected contention. For a pending claim, use its EP with that special issue. If the claim/legacy appeal is no longer pending, the table directs request-for-application handling with no other action under this table. Verify the actual hearing posture and separate rights.

Add the appropriate hearing tracked item with a one-day suspense, note hearing type, request method and receipt date, complete Manage Evidence and update VACOLS for legacy cases. This is a control procedure; use the hearing-specific rules for scheduling, timeliness and due process.

II.iii.3.A.3.a · Automation can establish scanned claims

Automation processes scanned paper 21-526EZ submissions in Centralized Mail, including QuickSubmit. It extracts claim information and begins establishment; a processor must still review the actual application and any exception.

II.iii.3.A.3.b · Review the information automation extracts

The process establishes EPs/contentions, applicable special issues and corporate flashes and associates uploaded evidence/mail. A lane indicator can appear on the first contention for segmentation. Check extracted information against the source submission and preserve all mail attachments.

II.iii.3.A.3.c · Some submissions require manual processing

Incomplete 21-526EZ, duplicate folders, system availability problems and claims accompanied by 21-22/21-22a are manual-processing exceptions. The underlying incomplete or duplicate record issue must be resolved; an automation exception does not make an incomplete benefit claim ready to establish.

II.iii.3.A.3.d · Identify automated claims from several fields

Use the automated date stamp, claim label and system-source/upload-user information together, including SMS as described in the source. D2D labels describe processing and do not by themselves establish the legal review lane. Use the authoritative A.1.c seven/eight-contention boundary; the automated-label example has inconsistent 010/110 text and must not override that table.

II.iii.3.A.3.e · Report recurring automation errors with traceable examples

Notify RO leadership and the District Director when consistent new errors are found; the RO Director sends the encrypted report to OFO with example file numbers, description and ticket number. A YourIT ticket uses the specified automail subject and relevant Veteran-record, VBMS claim ID, CM packet ID and troubleshooting information. Use actual authorized VA systems for those identifiers and retain the underlying corrective controls.

III.i.2.B.1.a · Notice must explain the evidence needed for the claim type

VA must provide notice of necessary information and medical/lay evidence not already supplied, using an effective method. VBMS or automation can generate it at establishment, but the processor must ensure its what-the-evidence-must-show (WTEMS) language fits the actual claim type. Do not include claimed conditions in the general 5103 letter or add diagnostic rating criteria, even when a particular evaluation is requested.

III.i.2.B.1.b · Notice may already be provided with the claim

EZ forms and qualifying electronic claim-submission services provide notice; the claimant may certify receipt on 20-0995. Concurrent notice is treated as received on the VA claim receipt date. The VA.gov 26-4555 housing interview is an explicit exception: it does not supply 5103 notice. Verify the actual form/service rather than assuming every online application covers it.

III.i.2.B.1.c · Some forms and certifications still need notice

Notice after submission may be needed for forms without standard notice, such as 21-8940 or 21-2680; a POA submitting a non-original claim without SEP; or 20-0995 certification that is blank, negative, or affirmed by a POA without claimant signature. Check the actual notice exceptions before duplicating a letter. Retain the sent notice and enclosures in the eFolder, excluding blank copies of forms requested to be returned.

III.i.2.B.1.d · Check the exact notice exceptions

A claim within one year of sufficient prior 5103 notice covering its type can be excepted. A supplemental claim within one year of a prior decision notice is excepted even if the prior decision addressed different issues. HLR is excepted. In the pending-claim context, claims not finally adjudicated under 3.160(d) also count.

No additional notice is needed if existing evidence, including available VAMC records, suffices for the maximum benefit and earliest effective date with no further development. Any needed development, including an examination, defeats that exception. Maximum here means the highest evaluation supported by adequate evidence, not a processor assuming that a partial grant is enough.

III.i.2.B.1.e · Use a custom notice when the locked standard cannot cover the claim

The standard VBMS template has the required general elements but cannot be edited for extra requirements. If insufficient, use Custom 5103 in VBMS-Letters, include the comprehensive WTEMS enclosure and any required extra notice language. A generated document still needs appropriate delivery and retention.

III.i.2.B.1.f · Special facts may need another development letter

If the standard notice does not obtain necessary special-issue facts, send the required development. Skip a redundant letter when the record already supplies the facts or otherwise suffices to decide, as with hepatitis records already addressing risk factors.

Use the listed procedures: asbestos VIII.iii.7.B.1.b; fire-related STRs III.ii.2.F.1.b; hepatitis V.iii.6.3.f; herbicide VIII.i.1.B.1.c; PTSD VIII.iv.1.A.2.g; personal trauma VIII.iv.1.B.2.c; mustard gas/Lewisite VIII.iii.3.A.3.b; former POW VIII.iv.2.C.1.a; and special operations VIII.iv.9.A.1.b. Jackson handles radiation development under VIII.iii.4.A for 3.309(d) and VIII.iii.4.B for 3.311. Homelessness needs special handling under X.i.1.2 but no extra 5103 notice merely for homelessness. Apply the separate FDC impact rules where relevant.

II.iii.2.E.1.a · First confirm this is the error addressed by the procedure

From March 24, 2015, a required prescribed form is necessary unless a specific exception applies. This section addresses a benefit request without that form which was established under a new EP or added to an existing EP and processed. If it was merely misidentified and development never started, use request-for-application handling in II.iii.2.G instead. Other EP, form or historical errors need their actual authority.

II.iii.2.E.1.b · Explain what VA accepted incorrectly and how to correct it

Tell the claimant/representative that the request was wrongly accepted, which issues are not valid claims and which form is needed. Explain that processing cannot continue without a complete prescribed application, any active ITF’s remaining period, and expedited submission through VA websites or a VSO. This explanation accompanies the specific contact and letter steps below.

II.iii.2.E.2.a · Separate single invalid claims from invalid issues on valid claims

Choose the correct table based on two facts: whether the improper contention is alone or shares an EP with valid contentions, and whether a rating decision addressed it. Promulgation/authorization further changes the steps. Do not convert or clear a valid EP merely because one contention was added improperly.

II.iii.2.E.2.b · Correct a single improperly established contention before decision

Check whether a same-benefit ITF was active before the error and seek authorized status correction if needed. If none, distinguish CM receipt from telephone/in-person contact: this specific correction directs an ITF effective the original contact date for the latter.

Make two contact attempts within 24 hours, using the authorized representative when present or calling the claimant otherwise. Successful telephone/in-person contact goes on 27-0820; retain all email. After success, allow two business days for a complete prescribed claim. If one arrived since the invalid establishment, change the invalid EP to 400 General Correspondence, clear it, establish the proper benefit EP with the complete-claim receipt as DOC and finish development there.

Without the complete form, a needed 21-526EZ uses EP 400 General Correspondence, Incorrectly Established Claim and clearance. In that branch an invalid AMA EP must be canceled and EP 400 established separately. A needed decision-review form uses EP 400 Request for Application - Manual and AMA Request for Application, with the specified affected-issue and corrective free text, then clearance. Read the original for exact letter wording.

II.iii.2.E.2.c · A decision on the invalid single-contention claim changes the correction

First review/correct the ITF or establish the contact-date ITF as applicable. If the rating has not been promulgated and authorized, return it to rating: pull into VBMS-R, remove the invalid master-record issues, return with update and request deletion of Narrative/Codesheet through the linked authorized process. Return to development under E.2.b Step 3.

If already authorized, use the appropriate EP 930: convert a still-pending invalid EP or establish a separate 930 after clearance with a permanent explanatory note. If a complete claim arrived, establish its proper EP/date where needed and preserve a current valid claim. Use the local-quality variant for RO-identified errors rather than automatically selecting the national-quality example.

Make/document two contact attempts within 24 hours. Success allows two business days, then review the response; unsuccessful attempts go directly to the formal letter step. A complete response for the old improper issues updates 930 contentions and the document subject to response to Incorrect Claim Establishment, then closes only the correction. With new issues, append with new issues, control/process those separately and clear the correction. Otherwise send Incorrectly Adjudicated Claim with the required forms and clear 930.

II.iii.2.E.2.d · Remove only improper contentions from a valid EP before decision

Review/correct any ITF or the qualifying original contact-date ITF. Remove the improper issues from the pending valid EP and establish EP 400 General Correspondence for correction contact. Make/document two attempts within 24 hours and allow two business days after successful contact. A complete form allows the affected issues back on the pending rating EP for continued processing; otherwise send Incorrectly Established Claim and clear the correspondence control. Valid issues remain controlled.

II.iii.2.E.2.e · Mixed valid EPs with a decision need careful control review

Review/correct ITF status or the qualifying contact-date ITF. If not promulgated/authorized, return the rating for removal of invalid issues and authorized document correction. The source then cross-refers to single-contention E.2.b Step 3; verify the appropriate mixed-claim control handling before any whole-EP conversion.

For an authorized decision, make/document two attempts within 24 hours; successful contact allows two business days. With a complete response and the original valid EP pending, add the issues back and finish development as needed. If that EP is cleared and a current EP specifically controls this correction response, the table directs changing that response EP to the appropriate 930 and adding a permanent note. With no response and the original EP cleared, establish the appropriate 930 and note. Use the local-quality variant for RO-identified errors.

The later steps direct updating/clearing 930 for response-only or new-issue forms, or sending Incorrectly Adjudicated Claim with the needed forms and clearing 930. Some still-pending rows and the unsuccessful-contact jump do not explicitly establish that 930 before referring to clearance. This is an unresolved source/control-sequence ambiguity: preserve valid EPs and obtain authoritative clarification rather than inventing a conversion or closure.

If the requested form is never returned, do not sever SC or revise the prior decision solely for the missing form; a decision independently erroneous requires its own correction authority. Later forms use E.3.a. Correcting this establishment error does not settle unrelated claims.

II.iii.2.E.2.f · A notified decision still has review rights

Accept a timely and otherwise properly submitted legacy appeal or decision review request even when the underlying decision arose from a claim without the required prescribed form. Apply the elected lane’s normal rules; do not deny review rights merely because VA established the original claim incorrectly.

II.iii.2.E.3.a · A form after the corrective 930 closes may need no new adjudication

Verify that the form responds to the prior incorrect-establishment guidance after correction 930 clearance. If it lists only the same affected issues, change its subject to response to Incorrect Claim Establishment, add a permanent note explaining the response requires no adjudication and cancel the tracking EP.

If it includes new issues, use response to Incorrect Claim Establishment with new issues, add a permanent note explaining those matters require adjudication, and process them under the appropriate EP. The phrase RO Request – Signature Needed may identify these forms but is not always present. Do not cancel an unrelated new claim or an actual decision review election under this response-only rule.

II.iii.2.C.1.a · An increase is based on a later change

A claim for increase is a type of initial claim based on a change or worsening since the last decision. A claimant asking VA to review that decision on the prescribed review form instead uses the selected decision-review lane.

II.iii.2.C.1.b · Identify the particular increased benefit

Increases can concern disability evaluation, IU, SMC or an additional dependency benefit. The article also includes pension income changes and special monthly pension; those benefits have their own requirements and are not made compensation claims by this list.

II.iii.2.C.1.c · Use the prescribed application

An increase requires 21-526EZ or the other prescribed application for that benefit. Evidence describing worsening does not automatically replace the needed application.

II.iii.2.C.2.a · Rating decides the evaluation and applicable special benefits

The rating activity evaluates the service-connected disabilities and statutory losses and considers applicable special benefits such as SMC. Development should identify the claimed change and assemble the evidence needed for that determination.

II.iii.2.C.2.b · Finish necessary development before the rating referral

Complete the increase claim’s required development, then refer it to rating. Use the linked IV.i.1.B.1.h rule to determine examination need; an increase label does not by itself prove that every case needs an examination.

II.iii.2.C.3.a · Screen the submission for increase versus decision review

Review all submissions concerning disability evaluation. The actual form and requested action distinguish an increase from a decision review; clarify unclear intent under III.i.2.D.1.c instead of guessing the claimant’s election.

II.iii.2.C.3.b · The submitted form matters even after a year

A proper increase application, such as 21-526EZ, follows increase procedures. A 20-0995 follows supplemental-claim procedures, including when filed more than a year after a decision. Evidence without the required increase application uses the request-for-application procedure in II.iii.2.G, while any pending claim’s evidence obligations still require review.

III.i.2.A.1.a · Start with notice and assistance duties

Apply the notification and evidence-assistance duties in 3.159 and the linked notice and development procedures. The general duty here works together with the particular claim and evidence-source rules.

III.i.2.A.1.b · Request necessary known evidence and follow new leads

The claimant ultimately has responsibility for supporting the claim, but VA requests necessary known evidence and develops newly identified relevant sources. Obtain Federal records and use the required release for private records rather than treating claimant responsibility as permission to skip assistance.

III.i.2.A.1.c · An assistance exception needs a supported finding

VA need not assist when there is no reasonable possibility that assistance would substantiate the claim, such as established legal ineligibility, lack of qualifying service or a claim clearly lacking merit. Apply the linked I.i.1.A.4 authority. An unknown fact or unanswered request does not itself establish an exception.

III.i.2.A.1.d · VA cannot pay a records-copying fee

VA does not pay fees charged by private, public, Federal, state or local custodians for copies of records. Tell the claimant how to obtain the material and review any other available evidence-assistance duties.

III.i.2.A.1.e · Use the state where the vital event occurred

For birth, death, marriage and divorce certificates, identify the state where the event occurred. Consult the current HHS Where to Write for Vital Records and National Center for Health Statistics application instructions and address; current residence may be different from the issuing jurisdiction.

III.i.2.A.1.f · Explain how a knowledgeable person can give a statement

Tell the claimant they may ask an identified person who knows about the disability or relevant activity to provide a statement. Forms 21-4138 and 21-10210 are available for this purpose. Seek the person’s own account of relevant facts.

III.i.2.A.1.g · Take all warranted actions at each touch

Perform the full necessary development, concurrently when authorized: for example, SSA and employment requests, or STR and private-record requests, can proceed together. However, complete relevant PMR development before obtaining the medical opinion on that condition as the linked IV.i.1.A.1.d directs. Concurrent development does not waive evidence prerequisites.

III.i.2.F.1.a · Keep core claim information correct

Every processor must maintain accurate claim receipt/DOC, EP series and label, service and character-of-discharge data, POA in Share/VBMS and document indexing. Use the authorized II.ii.2.A.2.a removal/transfer process for misfiled documents; correct the actual record without losing its supporting history.

III.i.2.F.1.b · Update corporate flashes as the facts change

Use current M21-4 Appendix E for corporate flashes. Remove foreign and homeless flashes when the facts require it; Formerly Homeless follows the linked M27-2 rule. Verify the correct indicator and its continuing factual basis.

III.i.2.F.2.a · Make each actual issue visible

Enter a separate contention for every expressly claimed issue or issue put at issue that needs development, including non-rating matters. Preserve the claimant’s language. Dependency entries use Dependency claim for [name] separately for each spouse or child. IU needs separate contentions for its identified causative service-connected disabilities. Separate bilateral matters when their differing dispositions require it while retaining the claimant’s context.

III.i.2.F.2.b · Verify automatically entered contentions

Automated entries may be unverified and lack required classification. Review, correct, classify and save them. Every reviewing processor remains responsible for verifying the contention data.

III.i.2.F.2.c · Classification and medical indicators serve different purposes

Choose the required appropriate classification, which may use a clinical term while the contention name retains the claimant’s words. Administrative Issue is for non-rating matters. Set Medical to Yes when an examination or opinion may be needed. Use Alternate Contention Name when confusing wording or additional context needs clarification for a standardized exam request.

IU specifically requires Unemployability classification and Medical set to Yes. These fields do not independently decide whether an examination is necessary; apply the actual examination and issue rules.

III.i.2.F.2.d · PMC contention classifications have their own table

The PMC table maps DIC to Service Connected Death; SC and NSC burial to Burial; and veterans/survivors pension, income/net worth, medical expenses, Medicaid, Medal of Honor survivor, liberalized pension, election, renouncement, whereabouts unknown and month-of-death matters to Pension.

Accrued, state plot, dependency, incarceration, fugitive felon, hospitalization, beneficiary/claimant death and undeliverable matters use Administrative Issue. Competency Review uses Competency. Special Monthly Pension uses Pension A&A/HB; Special Monthly DIC uses Service Connected Death A&A/HB. When both are involved, use Service Connected Death A&A/HB. Read the original table for exact system labels and the precise contention being entered.

III.i.2.F.2.e · Contention type reflects the present request

Choose the current asserted claim type, rather than copying the theory under which service connection was originally granted. An increase of an already service-connected secondary disability is Increase. A newly asserted secondary theory uses Secondary; a routine future examination uses RFE. This contention field does not override legal initial/supplemental lane or prescribed-form requirements.

III.i.2.F.2.f · Review mandatory special issues throughout the claim

Add a required special issue when its criteria exist, then update or remove it as the facts change during processing. For example, exclusion from FDC processing requires the appropriate change rather than leaving a stale indicator.

III.i.2.F.2.g · Apply claim-wide and issue-specific indicators at the right level

A claim-wide special issue such as COD or FDC needs to be on one contention. Issue-specific indicators such as Agent Orange, Asbestos or Burn Pit must appear on each applicable contention. Review the actual criteria instead of assuming one indicator covers every issue.

III.i.2.F.3.a · Tracked items control requests and communicate status

Use tracked items to control requested evidence and receipt. Claimants can see this information, so accurately describe the request and its actual status.

III.i.2.F.3.b · Use standard items before custom ones

Letters may automatically create standard tracked items. Use the appropriate standard item, and create a custom item only when no standard item exists for the actual request.

III.i.2.F.3.c · Record the response outcome accurately

Received includes a negative custodian response; add a system note explaining that result. It does not mean the desired evidence was obtained. Closed for nonreceipt requires expiration of the applicable period and completion of required follow-ups. If evidence later arrives while the claim remains pending, update to Received with the actual date; receipt supersedes the prior closure.

Use In Error for an erroneously created/requested item. Follow-Up 1 records a second request and Follow-Up 2 a third request; the governing evidence rule, not those labels, determines how many efforts are required.

III.i.2.F.3.d · Understand what the system can close or advance automatically

The system may automatically close expired, open, nonactionable items with no response when no further action is needed at that deadline. Manually setting the last item to Closed, Received or In Error can automatically move a rating claim to RFD or a non-rating claim to Ready to Work. These are system behaviors to verify, not independent proof of completed assistance.

III.i.2.F.3.e · Check automation and cancel the actual unneeded request

Verify that every necessary item exists and its dates/status are correct, including automated actions. If a PIES request is no longer necessary, close the tracked item and cancel the PIES request itself; one action does not perform the other.

III.i.2.F.3.f · Closed items do not establish readiness

Analyze the evidence to confirm that all requested material was received or properly accounted for and that the duty to assist is satisfied. Do not refer a claim as ready merely because every tracked item is closed.

III.i.2.F.4.a · Use a status that describes the actual remaining work

Open represents development, RFD readiness for rating, and Ready to Work readiness for non-rating action. Rating Decision Complete awaits promulgation; Rating Correction needs correction; Rating Incomplete reflects a rating returned to the corporate record from work pending. Closed and Cancelled identify completed or canceled controls. Read the record before relying on any status.

III.i.2.F.4.b · Tracked-item and claim-level suspenses interact

For an Open claim, claim-level suspense follows tracked-item dates. Add or reopen the appropriate tracked item when returning another status to Open and verify date recalculation. Other statuses have their own suspense behavior; changing status does not change the actual request or claimant response deadline.

III.i.2.F.5.a · Advance suspense only for a real action

Advance a suspense only when a specific necessary adjudicative action warrants it, never arbitrarily. Complete all appropriate actions at each touch and preserve accurate underlying evidence and notice dates.

II.iii.2.F.1.a · First identify which withdrawal rules apply

This article covers initial claims, including increases, compensation, dependency, pension, survivor and apportionment claims, withdrawn by the claimant or authorized representative. HLR/supplemental reviews use M21-5 Chapter 4 and 3.2500(d); Board and legacy appeals have their separate 20.205/19.55 rules.

II.iii.2.F.1.b · An initial-claim withdrawal does not require a special form

An acceptable withdrawal can be signed writing, a documented telephone or in-person request, or a qualifying electronic submission. It must identify the Veteran/claimant and file and the claim being withdrawn. Document telephone contact under III.i.2.D.1.e. These initial-claim methods must not be applied to decision reviews, which require writing or an approved electronic filing channel.

II.iii.2.F.1.c · Clarify an examination-provider report of withdrawal

An examination cancellation report saying the claimant wants to withdraw is insufficient. Telephone the claimant to confirm the actual intent and issues. If contact fails, send Clarification of Intent to Withdraw and continue the claim. If otherwise ready for decision, defer for 15 days from the clarification letter. Without a response after that period, proceed to a decision when otherwise ready, not presumed withdrawal.

II.iii.2.F.1.d · Receipt must precede decision notification

Withdrawal is valid only if received before VA issues the decision notification. A request after notification instead raises acceptance or renouncement of the resulting benefits. Compare actual receipt and issuance, not merely whether a rating draft exists.

II.iii.2.F.1.e · A valid withdrawal ends that pending claim

The claim ceases upon valid withdrawal receipt. Filing again later does not automatically preserve the withdrawn claim’s date. Review the specific timely-retraction and associated ITF rules where they apply.

II.iii.2.F.1.f · Initial-claim retraction has a 30-day opportunity

A claimant can retract within 30 days from VA’s notification of its withdrawal action, including a withdrawal VA erroneously inferred. The same acceptable methods as withdrawal may be used. The clock starts with VA’s withdrawal-action notice, not the claimant’s original withdrawal request or a suspense date.

II.iii.2.F.1.g · A later new claim has its own date

The example distinguishes a February claim, March withdrawal, April withdrawal notification and September new claim. The September filing does not regain February’s claim date merely because the earlier claim concerned the same benefit.

II.iii.2.F.2.a · Screen for timely withdrawal before taking control action

If receipt preceded decision notification, choose the all-issues or partial-withdrawal procedure. Otherwise send Untimely Claim Withdrawal Notification, clear correspondence EP 400 and take no further withdrawal action under this table. Renouncement has separate requirements.

II.iii.2.F.3.a · Full withdrawal depends on prior award history

A verified withdrawal of the whole identified claim applies to all its pending contentions. The table treats an unqualified withdrawal with no individually listed contentions as applying to the identified claim; unclear identity or intent still requires clarification.

Check whether an earlier award action granted or denied benefits. When it did, remove any previously deferred withdrawn issues from the codesheet through a rating for record purposes before notification. With no earlier award action, the table uses Basic Eligibility → Claim Withdrawn, withdrawal receipt as Event Date, acceptance and authorization. Do not use that action while an award is running: the manual warns that it stops the award. Reconcile unknown or inconsistent award history first.

II.iii.2.F.3.b · Partial withdrawal preserves the remaining issues

Annotate the identified contention names with the withdrawal date. Continue necessary development and decision of the other issues; do not clear their EP. Withdrawn issues must not appear as rating issues or deferred codesheet entries; record their date and list in Special Notation and issue the required decision notice.

The source’s first-step cross-reference skips listed notice/development steps. This explanation preserves the article’s explicit F.3.c withdrawal-notice requirement and the remaining-issue development obligations instead of interpreting that jump as permission to omit them.

II.iii.2.F.3.c · Send the withdrawal letter and explain retraction

Send Withdrawal of Claim Letter; for partial withdrawal identify the affected issues. Explain the 30-day retraction opportunity from VA’s withdrawal-action notification. No appeal or decision-review rights are required in this withdrawal letter. For all-issue withdrawal, clear the affected EP with Claim Withdrawn reason after the required actions; do not use whole-claim closure for a partial withdrawal.

II.iii.2.F.4.a · Restore a timely retracted claim with the proper control

For a timely retraction, use EP 930 with the original claim DOC if VA misinterpreted the withdrawal. Otherwise use the appropriate EP and original DOC, excluding original-claim EPs 110, 010, 140, 180 and 190 even when the earlier claim used one. Complete outstanding development and the required decision/notice. Review associated ITF corrections separately.

For an untimely retraction, notify the claimant that VA cannot execute it and take no further action on that retraction. A later valid new application retains its own applicable processing rules.

II.ii.1.B.1.a · Search thoroughly without indefinitely delaying a pending claim

Search the entire office and plausible locations, including file/name drawers, search lists, transfer and correspondence holdings, guardianship material and other ROs suggested by recent payment history. The requesting RO with pending mail reports the missing folder. Vendor inability to find or convert a scanning source uses the linked II.i.1.B.4 procedure.

For a pending EP, allow 30 days from claim receipt to locate the folder; after that period rebuild and continue any unfinished search. This is not 30 days from discovering the loss and is not a claimant response deadline.

II.ii.1.B.1.b · Document negative locations and rebuild the record

Retain the SMTS File not found screenshot and obtain physical-search responses from VSCMs at plausible ROs: priority within 24 hours and routine within five workdays. After negative location results, rebuild the eFolder, upload those results, request relevant claimant/POA copies and update BIRLS and the Rebuilt Folder flash. Maintain the marked rebuilt paper folder when a paper-format exception requires it. Preserve unfinished searches when the pending-claim 30-day rule requires rebuilding first.

II.ii.1.B.1.c · NOD and DEA processing have additional reconstruction steps

After unsuccessful search, retain the negative results in the rebuilt eFolder and apply the rebuilt indicator/flash. When the special paper-processing situation applies, obtain the listed fiscal/education record copies and mark the rebuilt cover as directed. Read the exact NOD/DEA instructions; this compensation-development explanation does not substitute for those benefit/appeal procedures.

II.ii.1.B.1.d · Consolidate a recovered original with the rebuilt folder

When the original is found, consolidate and scan its material into the rebuilt eFolder, then remove the rebuilt BIRLS indicator/flash. For a required paper folder, combine the records, clear the rebuilt designation and forward for review. Check recovered evidence for its effect on pending development.

II.ii.1.B.2.a · Verify who must resolve the duplicate records

The consolidating RO needs custody and jurisdiction of both records, arranging permanent transfers as necessary; the FRC physical-folder exception remains applicable. A duplicate created by a specific RO is that RO’s responsibility; an automation-created duplicate belongs to the discovering RO; VACO-created cases go to the RO nearest the Veteran’s residence.

II.ii.1.B.2.b · Use the designated duplicate-remediation channel

Send relevant documents, folders and applications to the local Duplicate Remediation POC, excluding finance-activity records. The POC uses DUPC through CSUM_NET. OBIBDQ handles designated records at locations 376 or 101-ICMHS after the POC completes the preparation in B.2.c. This is distinct from repeated claim documents or competing review elections.

II.ii.1.B.2.c · Prepare and consolidate without losing exams, claims or payment history

Expedite scanning through SMTS when needed. Add DUPC special issue to one contention on each pending EP and a File Requested tracked item. The authorized POC deletes Draft/Failed to Finalize letters in Package Manager. When multiple corporate records contain award data, the table requires the non-retained records’ awards to be terminated before proceeding; coordinate that authorized record/payment action and protect the correct retained benefit.

Cancel/re-establish affected non-retained pending EPs on the retained record while preserving contentions, classifications/types, special issues and tracked items. Do not cancel an EP with an outstanding examination or clarification until that work is completed and its results uploaded.

Submit YourIT/SNOW CSUM_NET DUPC BIRLS Correction, documenting which file/SSN is retained versus merged/removed. For NWQ-managed claims, send the prescribed Station#_today_DUPC Recall Request with claim IDs and ticket number, and retain the email in the eFolder.

OBIBDQ completes BIRLS consolidation only. The POC removes the duplicate indicator after completion; NWQ determines recall and routing after removal. Follow the separately linked corporate-remediation materials as needed; do not assume one ticket resolves every corporate/payment record.

IV.i.2.E.1.a · A&A examinations describe functional needs

The purpose is to establish functional findings for aid and attendance or housebound entitlement under 3.351 and 3.352. The examination supplies evidence for the decision; its request does not itself grant the benefit.

IV.i.2.E.1.b · Use existing sufficient evidence first

An examination may help when there is a reasonable probability of A&A or housebound entitlement but insufficient findings. Do not request one when the available evidence already independently supports entitlement. Review the applicable benefit and examination threshold rather than ordering by label alone.

IV.i.2.E.1.c · Use the actual A&A request options

CAPRI uses AID AND ATTENDANCE OR HOUSEBOUND EXAMINATION, with relevant COMMENTS. In VBMS, associate the ESR with the A&A contention, add relevant service-connected conditions under RATED ISSUE(S), select Special Monthly Compensation – Aid and Attendance/Housebound classification and include ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

Although the article says there is no separate A&A DBQ, it specifies the VBMS option DBQ A&A Worksheet – VA Form 21-2680. Use that worksheet option. Condition-specific DBQs are needed for claimed or properly in-scope increases, not automatically for every condition just because A&A is at issue.

IV.i.2.E.1.d · Do not substitute a local checklist

ROs must not devise their own A&A examination checklists. A provider checklist can be considered as evidence, but checked yes/no boxes without enough description may not establish the extent of incapacity or meet the required findings.

IV.i.2.E.2.a · Some non-Veterans may need examinations

The rating activity may request an examination for another claimant or beneficiary with the VSCM/PMCM or designated approval, or for the listed purposes. These include applicable A&A/housebound questions, Chapter 18 birth defects, insanity in wrongful-death situations, a child’s incapacity for self-support or incompetency, and beneficiary competency. Apply the specific benefit’s authority and approval requirements.

IV.i.2.E.2.b · Hospital observation is a rating option

The rating activity can request hospital observation when the disability picture cannot be resolved adequately through an ordinary examination. Development should preserve the precise unresolved question and supporting record for that determination.

IV.i.2.E.2.c · A field examination answers particular factual questions

A field examination may be appropriate when ordinary development cannot resolve competency, employment or social-adjustment facts, or specified pre-enlistment evidence. Follow X.v.1.E for the actual referral rather than using it as a general substitute for medical examination.

IV.i.2.E.2.d · Incarceration requires real attempts at access

Necessary examination assistance continues for an incarcerated Veteran, including IU examination even though incarceration can separately restrict IU payment. Coordinate with prison officials about escorted attendance at VA or examination in the prison by a VBA contractor, VHA personnel or VHA-contracted fee-basis provider. Include known facility, location, confinement, security and violence information; document substantial efforts and assistance by prison officials.

Apply the Incarceration flash and Incarcerated Veteran priority. Only after the provider documents exhaustion of every possible access avenue does this block equate inability to attend because of incarceration with failure to report under IV.i.2.F. Liberally consider good cause when release or transfer interferes. A cancellation alone proves neither exhaustion nor an automatic denial or payment reduction.

IV.i.2.E.2.e · A board of physicians requires the right composition

Rating may request at least two physicians, preferably three, with at least one relevant specialist and preferably all relevant specialists, for the identified complex or conflicting questions. Review the source’s examples and routing; the processor does not independently decide the medical disagreement.

IV.i.2.E.2.f · A different examiner needs a compelling reason

Rating determines whether compelling reasons support reexamination by someone else. The new request should explain that a different examiner is necessary, supply the specific question and identify the prior examiner and facility. Dissatisfaction alone is not an automatic new-exam order.

IV.i.2.E.2.g · Flag and expedite homeless cases

Use the required examination request indicator and remarks to expedite an examination for a homeless Veteran or one at imminent risk of homelessness. Maintain current contact and scheduling information so the priority can be acted upon.

IV.i.2.E.2.h · Foreign examinations use designated processors

Only designated foreign claims processors at a station with jurisdiction request foreign examinations and apply foreign out-of-network indicators. The vendor identifies the specific contentions needing Alternative Medical Evidence or Single Source Subcontracted Examination; apply FOONAME or FOONSSSCE accordingly. Do not guess the indicator or apply it to unrelated contentions. Remove these indicators from all contentions when the verified residence becomes domestic.

IV.i.2.E.2.i · Do not order an examination of a deceased Veteran

Do not request an examination, including ACE, after the Veteran has died. A necessary medical opinion may still be obtained to decide the appropriate disability or death-related survivor claim. That opinion has its own properly identified question and claim scope.

IV.i.2.E.3.a · Identify a true pre-discharge claim

The pre-discharge filing window is up to 180 days before separation. Program-specific eligibility and exclusion rules still apply; being within 180 days does not alone prove BDD eligibility.

IV.i.2.E.3.b · Complete SHA prerequisites and identify the necessary DBQs

BDD and IDES use the separation health assessment, including the required general medical, audiogram and laboratory components. Verify completed SHA Part A Self Assessment in the eFolder before the SHA request. Use appropriate DBQs for claimed or reported issues and relevant objective findings; do not automatically add specialty DBQs for every subjective unclaimed complaint lacking objective findings.

Tinnitus reported during SHA requires the audio DBQ even if not claimed. Adding a condition to the claim still requires the proper application. Conditions legally ineligible for service connection generally do not require separate specialist DBQs solely from the pre-discharge examination.

IV.i.2.E.3.c · Use SHA for the eligible program

BDD uses the SHA protocol and General Medical – Separation Health Assessment DBQ with the BDD claim remark. BDD-excluded pre-discharge claims use the required general medical examination rather than SHA. Requests first made after discharge have separately linked exceptions and must be checked against those rules.

IV.i.2.E.4.a · Use safe, necessary development during pregnancy

Pregnancy can affect both the interpretation of symptoms and safe examination methods. Use ACE to the extent allowed and possible; obtain medical guidance on necessary testing and its timing rather than having the processor decide whether a procedure is safe.

IV.i.2.E.4.b · Pregnancy-related symptoms require medical interpretation

The article lists anemia, back pain, leg edema, gestational diabetes or hypertension, shortness of breath and urinary tract infection as common ancillary conditions. These examples are not an instruction for the processor to diagnose, presume resolution or exclude a claimed chronic disability.

IV.i.2.E.4.c · Identify pregnancy on the request

The source describes x-rays, pulmonary function tests, range-of-motion, gait, laboratory and other potentially risky testing as not recommended in the pregnancy situation. Flag pregnancy and let the examining medical professional identify permissible examination portions and necessary omissions.

IV.i.2.E.4.d · Pre-discharge claims can require partial decisions

Pregnancy does not eliminate the pre-discharge filing opportunity. Use the prescribed request remarks asking the examiner to identify omitted examination portions and the earliest safe completion date. The receiving RO reviews supported grants and defers issues needing later testing. The source generally treats conclusion of pregnancy for these purposes as three months after delivery; this does not replace the examiner’s actual safety assessment.

IV.i.2.E.4.e · Other claims have three evidence-based dispositions

For non-pre-discharge claims, determine whether all examination must be deferred, the entire claim can be decided from available evidence, or some benefits can be granted while other issues await safe testing. Apply the distinct pre-discharge instructions when relevant and continue independent development.

IV.i.2.E.5.a · An independent medical opinion is a special process

An IMO under 3.328 comes from an independent expert outside VA for the identified significant medical complexity or controversy, or an applicable Board remand. It requires the designated approval process; it is not a label for every routine contract examination or medical opinion.

IV.i.2.E.5.b · Several participants can initiate the request

The RO, claimant, representative or Board may initiate an IMO request. Initiation does not establish entitlement to the opinion; the prescribed merit review and authorization still occur.

IV.i.2.E.5.c · Explain why an independent opinion is needed

Prepare the written request for the designated reviewer, explaining the medical complexity or controversy and the precise question. Supply the claim information and evidence needed for an informed review.

IV.i.2.E.5.d · Follow both merit review and notification

The designated local reviewer first evaluates merit. A supported compensation request goes through the prescribed Compensation Service process; pension uses its designated channel. Unsupported requests can be denied locally, while centrally forwarded requests receive the central determination.

After approval, the designated activity notifies the claimant and obtains the opinion, then provides a copy. If a claimant or representative initiated a denied request, provide the required denial notice. The IMO denial is contested with the primary issue through its applicable review/appeal process, not treated as an independently appealable merits decision.

IV.ii.2.B.1.a · A missed appointment does not by itself justify a reduction

The review examination must be necessary, the failure must lack good cause, and existing evidence must not already support continuation. Depending on the protected or supported disability level, the permissible action may be discontinuance or reduction only to a minimum or otherwise supported evaluation.

IV.ii.2.B.1.b · Refer the failure for rating review after checking address

Ordinarily send the failure-to-report evidence to rating. A better address instead requires the IV.i.2.F scheduling/notice procedure first; do not pursue adverse action without resolving that delivery issue.

IV.ii.2.B.1.c · Keep payments running during the proposal

Rating proposes the supported action. Authorization clears EP 310, establishes EP 600 with a 65-day control from the proposal notice, and sends the required due-process notice. Existing payments continue during the protected period.

IV.ii.2.B.1.d · Returned appointment mail needs separate handling

Use IV.i.2.F.1.c–d when the examination notice is undeliverable. Search for the current address and apply the appropriate scheduling instructions; returned mail does not automatically establish an unexcused failure.

IV.ii.2.B.2.a · Screen evidence, protections and combined impact

Apply 3.655(c)(2), including the opportunity to indicate willingness to report or submit evidence and the hearing protections. Verify lack of good cause and review static/protected disability rules under 3.951(b) and 3.957. If the overall combined evaluation is unaffected, this article says the 3.655 reduction provisions do not apply; rating uses the appropriate 3.500 facts-found date, or rating date when no other evidence fixes it.

IV.ii.2.B.2.b · Static means a future exam is not needed for that disability

Static disability is permanent in character based on its nature, history and severity, without a need for periodic future examination to establish continuation. Review the actual rating and evidence; age of the award alone is not a processor’s static-disability determination.

IV.ii.2.B.2.c · Preserve the supported minimum and protected disabilities

Rating considers all other static or protected disabilities and the supported minimum or alternative evaluation, then determines the resulting combined evaluation. If examination was unnecessary, use IV.ii.2.A rather than proposing an avoidable failure-to-report reduction.

IV.ii.2.B.2.d · Document why the failure is unexcused

The rating rationale should identify examination attempts, the absence of good cause, or why the offered reason does not establish good cause. A repeated failure does not remove the need to assess the actual explanation.

IV.ii.2.B.2.e · The proposal describes evaluations without a rating effective date

The proposed rating reviews the medical evidence, affected and continuing issues, proposed evaluations and combined evaluation. Do not place an effective date in the proposed rating. The notice separately supplies the proposed action date under B.3.a.

IV.ii.2.B.2.f · Responses can change the next action

A timely hearing request within the protected 30-day period defers action until the hearing/evidence requirements are addressed. A late hearing request alone does not have the same deferral effect. Willingness to attend can require rescheduling and deferral. With no response, the full 60-day opportunity must expire before final rating; the 65-day control supports administration, not a separate substantive deadline.

IV.ii.2.B.2.g · Obtain a final rating before authorization

Rating reviews all affected and continuing evaluations, the combined evaluation and evidence before final action. Without changed evidence, repeat the supported proposal basis after the full required period. A completed rescheduled exam supporting continuation/increase leads to the corresponding final rating; a completed exam supporting a revised reduction requires a new proposal and fresh due process. Hearing or other evidence can also change the result.

For the ordinary final failure-to-report reduction, use the later of the date specified in the proposal notice and actual Share date last paid. Include applicable noncompensable evaluations and consider 3.324 where appropriate. The repeat-failure provision in B.3.b/3.655(c)(3) has distinct timing that needs case-specific review.

IV.ii.2.B.2.h · Pension continuing entitlement has separate criteria

If a reason arises to review pension eligibility and the Veteran misses the examination, rating reviews available medical evidence, including special monthly pension entitlement, and updates every known disability. When permanent-total criteria are no longer met, prepare the failure-to-report rating and proposed adverse notice. When those criteria remain met, prepare a rating showing the disabilities at their static levels. Final action still follows B.2.g. This pension table is separate from compensation payment review.

IV.ii.2.B.3.a · Use the failure-to-report notice and date rule

The notice identifies current and proposed individual/combined evaluations and monthly payments, why examination is necessary, lack of good cause, the 60-day evidence/willingness opportunity and hearing rights. The described date is the later of the first day of the month 60 days after notice or date of last payment. Review the exact 3.655 notice rule and actual date; do not substitute the different 3.105 reduction procedure or merely the 65-day suspense.

IV.ii.2.B.3.b · Willingness before adjustment protects the rescheduling opportunity

If the Veteran is willing before the award is reduced or suspended, keep EP 600 and defer adjustment while arranging the examination. Provide the repeat-failure warning required by 3.655(c)(3). Another unexcused failure can lead to final rating and contemporaneous notice under that rule; examine its date-last-paid requirements rather than using an ordinary new-proposal clock automatically.

IV.ii.2.B.3.c · Protect the timely hearing

For a timely protected hearing request, maintain EP control and payments until the hearing is held, evidence is received or unobtainable and final rating occurs, unless the separate supported hearing-failure exception applies. Late requests use the distinct 3.655(c)(4) handling and do not nullify a separate willingness-to-attend protection.

IV.ii.2.B.3.d · Expired controls still require rating and proper notice

After the 65-day control with no response, obtain final rating, complete award action and send notice with VA Form 20-0998. Returned proposal mail with no better address uses the prescribed last-known-address process. If a new address is found, reissue the proposal, allow a new 65-day control and retain EP 600; do not use the old notice clock.

IV.ii.2.B.3.e · Do not create an overpayment solely for missing the exam

Use the later proposed-notice date or actual last-paid date as directed, even when a lost control allowed payments to continue longer. Failure to report by itself must not create a retroactive overpayment for that continued-payment period.

IV.ii.2.B.3.f · Authorization acts on the final rating

Once the required period and responses are resolved, rating supplies the final determination. Authorization then makes the corresponding corporate award adjustment; a proposed rating is not sufficient for that transaction.

IV.ii.2.B.3.g · An additional reduction needs additional notice

If final rating would lower the combined evaluation further than the original proposal, provide a new proposal for that extra reduction. The originally noticed reduction may be implemented when otherwise proper, but the extra amount cannot bypass its own due process.

IV.ii.2.B.3.h · Coordinate military retired-pay effects

Use the prescribed retired-pay coordination/RPC notifications for the authorized adjustment. Any later resumption has the separately linked VI.ii.4.B requirements; the examination procedure does not calculate all retired-pay interactions.

IV.ii.2.B.3.i · Verify the abandonment trigger instead of guessing it

The introduction describes one year from examination-request notification, while the table refers to the originally scheduled or applicable rescheduled examination date. Reconcile the actual 3.158 authority and notices before an abandonment finding; this tool does not resolve that textual inconsistency by inventing a single trigger. A later new claim and attendance within its required examination period have their own effective-date treatment. Keep running-award reduction protections separate.

IV.ii.2.B.3.j · Missing evidence and incompetency have exceptions

Use VI.i.1.A.4 for relevant missing evidence and X.ii.6.D.1.b for the incompetent-beneficiary situation. Do not assume the general abandonment or examination rule overrides those separately linked exceptions.

X.v.2.A.1.a · Active-service pay interrupts payment, not potential entitlement

Compensation cannot be paid concurrently with the applicable active-service pay. Returning to duty does not extinguish the pending claim’s possible entitlement, including a payable period before the return.

X.v.2.A.1.b · Continue the duty to assist

Complete feasible development during active duty and arrange an examination when the Veteran is available. Do not deny merely because active service prevents attendance. A death during the pending claim raises the separate accrued/survivor rules.

X.v.2.A.1.c · Separate issues that can be decided from those blocked by development

After every currently possible development action, send rating issues to rating and others to authorization. Missing development irrelevant to an issue does not bar its grant or denial; relevant missing development may still allow a supported grant. When relevant missing development would otherwise produce a denial or incomplete evaluation, defer the affected issue.

Rating records the active-duty deferral in both narrative and codesheet, even if all issues are deferred, and does not initiate the ordinary VBMS deferral action in this special procedure. For a partial decision, use the prescribed free text, apply Returned to Active Duty flash and clear the EP after proper action. For all-deferred claims, follow the specified award action, reject automatic notice, send Suspension of Claim Due to Return to Active Duty, then cancel the EP in Share after authorization and document the reason/flash.

Do not give decision-review rights for undecided deferred issues; issues actually decided retain their applicable rights. Keep the original claim history and whether its EP was cleared or canceled because those facts determine resumption control.

X.v.2.A.1.d · Explain suspension and the resumption opportunity

Use the prescribed letter language describing missing development, active-duty impediment and the possibility of completing examination if available. Explain reporting release and requesting claim resumption within one year to preserve the original claim date, with abandonment consequences outside that opportunity. Exact required letter text remains in the original.

X.v.2.A.1.e · Resuming the suspended claim alone requires no new form

Accept the request to resume the previously suspended claim without demanding a prescribed application solely for that action. A newly claimed issue still needs its proper form.

X.v.2.A.1.f · Timely resumption preserves the original claim

A qualifying request within one year of release preserves the original claim date. Outside the applicable opportunity, the suspended claim is abandoned and a later new claim has its own requirements; the source does not require a separate abandonment notice with review rights. Remove the abandoned deferred issues from the codesheet as directed. They were never denied, so new and relevant evidence is not required merely because of the earlier deferral.

X.v.2.A.1.g · Use the correct control when work resumes

If the old EP was cleared after a partial decision, establish EP 930 with original DOC. If it was canceled after all issues were deferred, establish the appropriate rating EP with current resumption receipt as DOC, while preserving the timely original claim date for entitlement. Properly claimed new issues may share the EP.

Resume necessary development, provide 5103 notice when more than a year has passed since the previous notice, and decide the previously undecided and properly added issues. Do not redo already decided issues solely because of resumption. Remove Returned to Active Duty flash after all previously deferred issues have been decided.

X.v.2.A.1.h · Develop evidence for the interrupted historical period

Obtain STRs from the latest active service and relevant historical medical or lay evidence about the affected period and duty impact. A retrospective opinion may be needed to address the earlier disability level. A present-day examination alone may not answer the entire interrupted-period question.

X.v.2.B.1.a · Identify the benefit and actual paid service

Applicable active-service pay bars concurrent compensation or pension, including full-time AGR under Title 10 or Title 32. Title alone is not the payment test and does not independently establish qualifying service for a new disability. DIC can be paid with active-service pay. Training/drill waivers require their separate rules.

X.v.2.B.1.b · Verify dates and notice authority before discontinuance

Review a Veteran’s report or verify another source through DPRIS/VIS. GRAS periods beginning on or after October 1, 2020 distinguish nontraining service. Contradictory unvoided DD214, corrected DD215 or unrevoked orders control over incorrect VIS data under the table. Earlier GRAS can include training days already addressed on 21-8951; avoid duplicate deductions. If no unreported paid period is established, annotate and clear EP 290 without discontinuance.

For the manual proposal route, use EP 290 with discovery DOC and the prescribed EP 600, begin/end-date contentions, Potential Under/Overpayment issue and Return to Active Duty Proposal tracked item. Consolidate nonconsecutive periods without canceling unrelated work. Develop orders/service evidence, use 21-0789 and allow the required response or 65-day control with hearing/contrary-evidence protections. Explain restoration when the latest end date is unknown.

The December 2023 regulation adds qualified exceptions to advance notice, including particular DoD compensation cases after required prior notice for the same service type and other 3.103(b)(3)(v) conditions. The older manual table does not fully state those qualifications. Verify actual notice authority, evidence, waiver and pay comparison; neither blanket immediate action nor a blanket new 65-day proposal fits every case.

X.v.2.B.1.c · Distinguish the last entitled day from the award event date

The statutory last entitled day is the day before return to paid active service. VBMS Basic Eligibility ordinarily uses the return date as the first nonpayable day. A new rating is not required solely for this administrative discontinuance. Unknown dates require verification rather than invented precision.

X.v.2.B.1.d · Future return dates have a documented system workaround

The article describes a system that cannot accept a future Event Date: use current Event Date with the actual future Award Effective Date, generate the award and use the RADL notice. Verify that limitation and current system instructions before applying the workaround; it does not authorize stopping payments early.

X.v.2.B.1.e · Develop the pending claim separately

Continue the duty to assist and use X.v.2.A for active-duty-blocked development. A payable pre-active-duty period may still be awarded. Discontinuing current compensation is not a denial of all pending issues.

X.v.2.B.1.f · Release evidence can start reinstatement review

Verify the discharge documentation and whether the earlier stoppage was correct, and inform the Veteran of the reinstatement opportunity. The captured 3.654(b)(2) recognizes timely DoD release notice as well as a Veteran request; do not require an extra claim solely because this manual passage emphasizes a request.

X.v.2.B.1.g · Reinstate the old award while developing separate outstanding questions

No prescribed form is needed solely to reinstate the existing award; the source accepts an ITF communication as a reinstatement request. Concurrent new, increase or supplemental issues need their proper applications. Verify release through service records or request official evidence; the table gives 30 days for an unanswered release-evidence request before denying reinstatement, with required notice and time-limit review.

Use the BDD control when applicable. Otherwise reinstatement alone with static disabilities or future exams not yet due uses EP 290; matured nonstatic review exams require EP 290 plus EP 310. Concurrent claims add the proper rating EP and any necessary EP 310, subject to the solely-increase-for-the-same-due-nonstatic-disability exception. Reserve/Guard releases before September 1, 2014 for Coast Guard or January 1, 2014 for others can require manual STR requests; apply the actual table and ordinary HAIMS rules.

Resume all prior service-connected disabilities at the prior combined evaluation without a new rating, except the old-codesheet exception in B.1.h. A qualifying request or DoD release notice received within one year supports the day after release under 3.654(b)(2); without a timely trigger, the late-claim rule uses one year before the new claim’s receipt. A late DoD notice is not automatically that new claim. Verify timing and actual trigger.

Address retired pay and separation-pay recoupment separately. Develop properly claimed issues and necessary matured review exams after reinstatement; sufficient evidence can eliminate unnecessary examination. Do not postpone an otherwise supported grant solely for missing STRs; retain control and send later records for rating review. Future exams remain tied to their actual maturity dates.

X.v.2.B.1.h · Correct obsolete rating discontinuance entries

If the old codesheet contains Active Duty Discontinuance selections, rating removes them and authorization promulgates the corrected record, recreating the required administrative interruptions/corporate history. Ordinary reinstatement must not proceed against an unresolved obsolete rating discontinuance.

X.v.2.B.1.i · New disabilities and increases keep their own rules

A new service-connected condition, increased evaluation or review of a previously denied issue has its own proper application, evidence and effective-date requirements. Reinstatement of the old award does not automatically establish those additional benefits.

X.v.2.B.1.j · Reinstatement is not a new award for the next-month rule

Do not apply 3.31’s next-month commencement solely to restoration of the previous compensation award. Newly granted service connection, increase or added dependent benefits still require their applicable commencement analysis.

X.v.2.B.1.k · Late discovery of both endpoints has a different result

When VA first discovers the return and later discharge together while compensation continued, limit the retroactive interruption to the actual active-duty period and restore from the day after discharge regardless of a belated reinstatement request. Do not apply the ordinary late-request limitation to this simultaneous-discovery situation without reviewing its specific facts.

XIV.5.1.a · The match is a lead with identifiable service data

VADIR activation matching is released about two months after the relevant month and identifies Reserve/Guard activation for Hines ITC screening and controls. From October 2020 it includes nontraining GRAS periods marked No in VIS’s TRAINING column. Training-duty benefit waivers use a separate procedure; verify the actual service period before payment action.

XIV.5.1.b · Check what automation actually established

The source describes ITC EP 600 Return to Active Duty, generated proposal, 65-day control, begin/end-date contentions and a Return to Active Duty Proposal tracked item. Additional nonconsecutive activation periods generate EP 290 for manual processing under X.v.2.B.1.b.

This captured chapter’s January 2022 instructions predate the 2023 qualified notice exceptions. Verify the actual work item and 3.103 authority rather than assuming every current DoD case must have the same generated proposal or permits immediate discontinuance.

XIV.5.1.c · The response determines automated versus manual handling

For the described generated proposal, no response through the 65-day control leads to automated adjustment without further RO action. Agreement closes the tracked item on actual receipt for automation, although authorized manual action can limit overpayment. Disagreement closes the original item on receipt and creates Other Request / Return to Active Duty – Manual Process with 30 days from its actual creation; the disputed case needs manual evidence review.

An election to waive military pay requires the prescribed encrypted MILPAY referral in authorized VA systems, with identifiers, period and document ID, retaining its PDF in the eFolder and awaiting staff action. Hearing requests follow X.ii.3.B.3. Neither silence nor disagreement should be relabeled as the other, and the tool does not transmit any referral.

X.iii.1.C.1.a · Check allowance, expense and exceptions first

Ordinary A&A hospitalization adjustment concerns VA expense; higher allowances under (r)(1)/(r)(2), and (t) in 3.552(b)(2), use United States Government expense. The ordinary first nonpayable day is the first day of the second month after admission, corresponding to the regulation’s last-payable-day wording.

Ordinary A&A exceptions include paraplegia of both legs with loss of anal and bladder sphincter control, and Hansen’s disease; blindness is a pension-only exception here. The higher-allowance rule excludes those ordinary exceptions. Verify the actual statutory rate and hospitalization rather than assuming any care-facility stay requires reduction.

X.iii.1.C.1.b · Insurance reimbursement does not remove the expense rule

VA recovery of hospital costs from an insurer does not remove the 3.552 hospitalization adjustment. Determine the actual government-expense status rather than treating insurer payment as a universal exemption.

X.iii.1.C.1.c · Validate the admission work item before changing the award

Verify the automated CNH/EP 330 label and whether the benefit actually needs adjustment. If no adjustment is needed, clear it with the supported reason. If needed, obtain CAPRI admission, discharge and treatment records. For compensation use the prescribed EP 330-to-320 Review Due to Hospitalization action, complete that control and establish the EP 600 due-process control as directed; pension uses its own listed route.

X.iii.1.C.1.d · Send the proposal to both locations

Send the required hospital-adjustment proposal to both the address of record and the medical facility. Pension can also require 3.551 action; that is separate from compensation A&A.

X.iii.1.C.1.e · Check current hospital status before authorizing

After the required 65-day opportunity, or the Veteran’s verified request for earlier adjustment to limit overpayment, apply the proper hospital rate and date with required notice. Check current CAPRI status; do not make an open-ended reduction for an already completed stay.

If compensation discharge is found while processing EP 600, restore from discharge under that control. Prior permanent-total A&A needs no further continuing-entitlement rating solely for discharge; otherwise establish the required EP 320 with discharge DOC and send the records to rating. For pension with prior rated A&A, restore under EP 600 from discharge. Without prior rated A&A, establish EP 120 with discharge DOC for rating review.

X.iii.1.C.1.f · Calculate the actual hospitalized rate

Apply the compensation rate appropriate under 3.552(d)–(j), including allowable dependent and (k) components; it is not always a housebound rate. Under 3.552(c), no reduction occurs when the same monthly compensation is payable without A&A. Pension uses the housebound rate subject to the applicable 3.551 Section 306/current-law limits. If income for VA purposes exceeds the housebound rate, the source directs an award withholding of the amount payable based on A&A entitlement. If compensation would be greater, obtain the required election rather than automatically switching benefits; the source does not require a new prescribed compensation application solely for that election.

X.iii.1.C.2.a · Initial entitlement timing matters

When A&A entitlement precedes admission, the source describes the initial payment commencement and then the hospital reduction from the first day of the second month after admission. Verify both the entitlement and actual initial payment dates.

If A&A first arises on or after admission, 3.552(k) governs hospital-period payment and later discharge. The regulation preserves its ordinary (a)(2) exception and the applicable hospitalized statutory rate. Do not interpret the manual’s housebound shorthand as a universal rate or as eliminating an applicable exception.

X.iii.1.C.2.b · A later medical-entitlement reduction is separate

If rating removes A&A or housebound entitlement during hospitalization, continue the currently payable hospital rate while providing the required proposed action, 65-day control and final rating process. The admission itself is not that final entitlement decision.

X.iii.1.C.3.a · Restore hospital-reduced A&A on discharge

Use the verified discharge date to restore the hospital-reduced compensation allowance. For the specified CNH discharge report, change EP 330 to EP 320 with discharge DOC. Prior permanent-total A&A does not need another continuing-entitlement rating solely because discharge occurred; otherwise keep the proper EP 320 and provide CAPRI records to rating. A separate final loss of medical entitlement cannot be reversed merely by this hospital restoration procedure.

X.iii.1.C.3.b · A qualifying long authorized absence can restore A&A

For a verified authorized absence of at least 30 days, the source restores A&A from departure on the hospital report. Its readmission discussion also invokes Section 306 pension provisions; verify the compensation-specific authority before importing any 3.556 or pension payment mechanics.

X.iii.1.C.3.c · Non-bed care here is a pension procedure

During the initial hospitalization period, a report of non-bed-care status or authorized absence of at least 30 days stops the reduced Section 306 pension payment. Restore the regular pension rate from departure; if A&A was established, restore that rate from departure. This uses 3.556(a)(1) and is not a general compensation transaction.

X.iii.1.C.3.d · The readmission example uses Section 306 limits

When hospitalization resumes after the qualifying long absence, discontinue the A&A allowance from readmission and reduce Section 306 pension to $50 from readmission under the listed 3.556(a)(2)/3.551(c) rules. Those pension-specific rates and authorities must not be imported into compensation.

X.iii.1.C.3.e · Read the pension example in its own scope

The example has August 10 admission, November 15 authorized long absence and January 5 readmission. It reduces Section 306 pension to housebound October 1 and $50 November 1, restores A&A November 15, then returns to $50 January 5. This illustrates that pension sequence, not a new compensation rate rule.

X.iii.1.C.3.f · Short absences are reconciled at final discharge

An authorized absence shorter than 30 days produces no immediate adjustment under this block. At final discharge, review the actual qualifying absence days and make the prescribed retrospective credit with award annotation. The pension example totals two four-day absences and adjusts the illustration accordingly; it does not establish that estimated, unauthorized or future days qualify.

X.iii.1.C.3.g · Irregular-discharge readmission uses a six-month test

Verify that the previous discharge meets the linked irregular-discharge definition. Readmission within six months uses readmission as the first nonpayable day for the applicable A&A allowance; at six months or later, treat it as a new admission and use the ordinary first day of the second following month. Required due process still applies.

X.iii.1.C.4.a · Expedited special monthly pension has a limited purpose

Expedited special-monthly-pension determination may help a permanently and totally disabled Veteran who no longer needs hospital treatment but needs A&A or is housebound due to chronic incapacity for self-care. Assurance of the increased pension may make discharge home or to a private nursing home feasible. An A&A rating may also support the appropriate housebound payment while still hospitalized; this is not a compensation SMC rule.

X.iii.1.C.4.b · Use the specified pension evidence and processing steps

The medical facility determines whether discharge is medically feasible, the Veteran is willing and adequate care can be arranged at home or another suitable place. When those conditions are met, the Chief, Medical Administrative Specialist or authorized official completes VA Form 21-2680, sends it to the RO and reports the proposed discharge.

X.iii.1.C.4.c · Coordinate the expedited pension decision and payment

Rating decides A&A or housebound need and whether the A&A rate remains payable during hospitalization. This establishes eligibility for the increased pension limit, not payment regardless of income; income still must fall within the applicable MAPR. Authorization awards the permitted A&A or hospitalized rate and, on discharge, adjusts to the A&A rate from discharge. DOC may be the examination or admission date. Evidence of SMP eligibility received within one year of basic-pension eligibility notice may support A&A from the basic-pension award date.

VII.i.1.D.1.a · RBPS processes eligible dependency requests

The Rules-Based Processing System reduces manual processing time for dependency claims that fit its automated rules. A system label or cleared EP does not independently establish that every required decision, award and notice is correct.

VII.i.1.D.1.b · Applications enter through several channels

The source describes online 21-686c/21-674 questions, transcription of submitted forms by a contractor, and designated VA employees completing applications during an in-person, telephone or video interview. The actual application and supporting evidence still belong in the claim record.

VII.i.1.D.1.c · Check the actual automated outcome

An eligible case uses EP 130, RBPS decision rules and VETSNET processing; ITC clears the EP and produces/uploads the award print and decision notice. RBPS-rejected cases go through NWQ for manual development and adjudication; rejection by automation is not a benefit denial.

For incremental EP 131/132 while EP 130 is pending, the station working EP 130 consolidates the dependent work and obtains proper jurisdiction before canceling the incremental controls as Worked Under Proper EP. Preserve all evidence and unresolved actions under the surviving control.

VII.i.1.D.1.d · Several dependency cases need manual processing

The listed exclusions are adopted children, children over 18 permanently incapable of self-support, schoolchildren whose tuition is paid by the Federal government, possible attorney-fee withholding, foreign addresses, and removing a spouse while children remain on the award. Check the actual category rather than assuming every 686c can be automated. The tuition cross-reference to A.2.k is stale in the current A article; use the actual governing school-benefit source.

VII.i.1.D.1.e · Missing uploaded documents need recovery

Use II.ii.2.A.5 when the underlying claim documents were not uploaded. A system transaction or generated decision is not a substitute for preserving the actual application and evidence in the eFolder.

VII.i.1.D.1.f · An automated below-30-percent denial can need correction

This block describes automatic denial and closure in certain EP 130 cases with an evaluation below 30 percent, including concurrent EP 020/130 processing. A.4.c separately requires postponing dependency disposition for a pending qualifying rating and explicitly says RBPS does not accommodate that exception. Reconcile the actual decision, control and notice through the proper correction procedure; do not treat the automated denial as eliminating the pending-rating rule.

VI.i.1.A.1.a · Assemble the record before authorization

Review all necessary evidence, including protected Federal tax information when relevant, and obtain a rating decision when the issue requires one. Then prepare the authorized award or denial from the actual record; authorization does not replace required development or medical decision-making.

VI.i.1.A.1.b · Resolve each issue and notify the claimant

Authorization encompasses a decision on each claimed issue and its notice. Keep the EP pending until all required issues are resolved, except when a particular procedure permits a partial award or specific clear/cancel action. Finishing one award line is not whole-claim completion.

VI.i.1.A.1.c · Payment interactions require their own authority

An otherwise established award may involve separation-pay recoupment, military retired pay, survivor benefit plan interactions, another VA benefit, or proposed-incompetency withholding. Apply the actual offset/election/withholding rule rather than withholding everything by default. The source also identifies the Parents’ DIC compensation-income exclusion and other separately linked benefit interactions.

VI.i.1.A.1.d · A Veteran spouse may have an affected award

Apply the Veteran Married to Veteran flash on both records even if the other Veteran is not receiving benefits. If the spouse receives pension or Parents’ DIC, establish EP 150 PMC – Income Adjustment on that award, using the actual compensation-authorization date as DOC. The authorized referral and underlying identifiers belong in VA systems.

VI.i.1.A.1.e · Supplemental decisions still need the proper decision-maker

A supplemental claim raising basic eligibility differs from one requiring a medical or disability determination. The specified disability/special-medical/restoration questions need a rating. A pension claim barred by established income or net worth does not require an unnecessary medical examination and rating solely to deny that legal ineligibility.

VI.i.1.A.2.a · Promulgation connects rating to the award

After the rating activity completes its decision, authorization prepares and processes the corresponding award and notice. Verify the actual decision and data; a referral to authorization is not evidence that payment has already been released.

VI.i.1.A.2.b · Separate entitlement from payment commencement

Ordinary original, supplemental and increased awards, including added-dependent increases, generally become payable from the first day of the next month under 3.31. Review the regulation’s continuity, withheld/suspended-payment, retired-pay, legislative-increase and same-calendar-month 4.29 exceptions before applying that date. It describes entitlement to payment, not a bank deposit date.

The source also describes the statutory exception for retirement/separation from active service because of a qualifying catastrophic disability on or after October 1, 2011. Verify the permanent, severely disabling ADL/supervision criteria and the reason for separation; a high evaluation alone is insufficient. Restoration of a previous award can differ from a newly granted increase.

VI.i.1.A.2.c · Review the codesheet, award and notice together

The VSR performs the required cursory rating review, including obvious Chapter 35 implications of a total evaluation without future examination, and resolves codesheet/RATING-screen discrepancies with rating. Prepare accurate award lines and a notice that reflects all changes. The limited RATING-screen override and converted-BDN workarounds are not permission to change a medical rating to make the award fit.

The SVSR verifies accuracy, returns identified errors or authorizes the award with the expected mailing date and proper enclosures. Use the prescribed deferral/NWQ process for returned work. A suspense needs an actual required action; do not manufacture an arbitrary hold.

VI.i.1.A.2.d · No monetary change is only one self-authorization condition

Self-authorization also requires explicit employee authority and a permitted category: dependent denial, rating denial/confirmed-and-continued, or service-connection grant/increase with no combined-evaluation change. Original claims, administrative decisions, PMC and Nehmer cases are excluded. A no-combined-change decision can still change money and therefore fail the rule.

VI.i.1.A.2.e · Large payments and overrides need additional concurrence

Net payment of $40,000 or more, or use of Generate Award Override, requires VSCM/PMCM or designated concurrence in addition to ordinary authorization review. Either trigger is sufficient. A fiduciary retroactive payment can also have separate concurrence requirements under its linked procedure.

VI.i.1.A.3.a · A zero-percent grant is still a grant

A denial refuses or withholds an entitlement and includes applicable confirmed-and-continued or reduction decisions. An initial award of service connection evaluated at zero percent is a grant even though it may not produce a monthly payment.

VI.i.1.A.3.b · Authorization decides only matters within its authority

Authorization may decide basic legal eligibility, dependency, income/net worth and the specified prescribed nursing-home A&A evidence for the listed benefits. Medical questions such as whether STRs support service connection or a disability caused death require the rating activity. Follow any required formal administrative-decision process as well.

VI.i.1.A.3.c · A legal bar can permit denial without rating

An established statutory/legal eligibility bar, or the specified nonresponse after a proper request for evidence needed to resolve that bar, can permit authorization denial without a medical rating. The special survivor cause-of-death situation has its own conditions. Provide the required reasons, evidence, law, unmet elements and favorable findings; do not infer a bar from incomplete medical development.

VI.i.1.A.3.d · Missing evidence does not erase required assistance

Obtain and review required evidence or properly establish exhaustion, nonexistence or futility for Federal records, unless an established statutory bar removes the assistance requirement. A formal claim requires the applicable decision and notice. An ancillary issue within scope does not invariably require a separate formal denial merely because it was considered.

VI.i.1.A.3.e · An incomplete application is not automatically a denial

When a prescribed application is missing or not substantially complete, use the application/incomplete-claim procedure and its exceptions. Do not issue a merits denial solely to clear an informal communication or an application lacking its required elements.

VI.i.1.A.4.a · Nonresponse can lead to a decision on the record

After the proper response opportunity and assistance review, obtain a rating when required and consider what the existing evidence can support. A missing-evidence denial explains the insufficiency and submission of 20-0995 with the evidence within one year of the decision notice. A later continued denial or changed legal basis following new evidence requires the appropriate new notice.

VI.i.1.A.4.b · A missed examination has development and payment safeguards

Apply the actual failure-to-report procedure, including notice, good cause and rescheduling, then the required rating and authorization action. Explain when the available record cannot support a favorable decision and applicable examination/DBQ evidence options. Existing payments have separate protections; a canceled examination is not automatic authority to reduce them.

VI.i.1.A.4.c · Abandonment requires an undecided claim at expiry

This block applies when requested evidence was not furnished within one year and no decision had been made when that period expired. Verify the request, response and applicable deadline facts. An already denied claim must not be relabeled abandoned. A properly abandoned claim does not require the decision-review rights associated with a merits decision.

VI.i.1.A.5.a · A changed basis can require a new award and notice

Reprocess the proper award and decision notice when correcting the basis for the prior action. Binding favorable findings can be changed only under the applicable 3.104(c) standard; they are not optional text to remove simply because a later decision uses a different rationale.

VI.i.1.A.5.b · Some authorizations use separate specialist procedures

The article directs particular pension-income, death-gratuity, record-disclosure and foreign-resident issues to their governing procedures. Apply those specific requirements where relevant rather than treating the general award checklist as complete coverage of those benefits.

VI.i.1.B.1.a · Check adverse-action notice before release

Determine whether an adverse change requires advance notice or qualifies for contemporaneous notice under X.ii.3.A/C and the benefit-specific rule. A generated final award letter does not prove that the required response or hearing opportunity was provided.

VI.i.1.B.1.b · Tell the claimant what changed and why

The complete package identifies decided issues, evidence, law, reasons, access/review information, applicable unmet elements and favorable findings. Explain evaluation criteria where applicable and payment dates, amounts, withholding, dependency changes and overpayment repayment/waiver information. An adjustment without an active claim does not automatically require new favorable findings.

A zero-percent service-connection grant still needs its entitlement effective date. A monthly-payment table is needed for the applicable initial monetary or combined/current-payment change, not invented when no payment changes. Pension income/expense calculations and visually impaired claimants have additional specific requirements.

VI.i.1.B.1.c · A missing notice can leave the claim legally open

If notification cannot be located, proceed as though the claimant was never notified; clearing an EP does not establish a binding notified decision. Package Manager statuses other than IN_PROGRESS or FINALIZED mean the notice was not sent, and IN_PROGRESS alone does not prove dispatch. Use II.i.2.C.6 for returned essential mail. The block’s reference to B.1.n is stale; current release steps appear at B.1.o.

VI.i.1.B.1.d · Combine the appropriate grants and denials

Use one combined decision notice for the issues granted and denied together, with the required explanation of each. Do not make the claimant reconcile separate overlapping notices for a single coordinated decision when the combined-notice procedure applies.

VI.i.1.B.1.e · Write so the claimant can understand the action

Use clear, compassionate, ordinary language and explain necessary VA terms. Avoid unexplained acronyms, unnecessary technical detail and vague conclusions. The notice must communicate the actual decision and what the claimant can do next.

VI.i.1.B.1.f · Identify evidence rather than citing the entire folder

List the evidence considered as identifiable documents. An attached rating can provide its own evidence list and reasons; a separate authorization decision still needs its own evidence. Evidence already discussed in the relevant proposal need not be needlessly repeated under the specified exception.

VI.i.1.B.1.g · Name requested forms precisely

When requesting a form, provide both its name and number so the claimant knows what to submit. Identify documents by type and date where required rather than relying on an internal system label or a bare form number.

VI.i.1.B.1.h · Include the actual reasons for the decision

Attach the rating or administrative decision with its required reasons, or supply the authorization decision’s reasons in the notice. Ensure the package as a whole explains the action in plain language; a decision code alone is insufficient.

VI.i.1.B.1.i · An underlying no-service-connection denial can explain dependency

When no service-connected disability is established, the underlying compensation notice can supply the reason additional dependent benefits cannot be paid without a separate dependency denial. This differs from a Veteran who has service connection but remains below the 30-percent threshold.

VI.i.1.B.1.j · Give the applicable review instructions

Include the required disagreement/review information and 20-0998 where appropriate. Contested claims, Board implementation and other specific actions can have different routes or periods. Do not provide ordinary one-year/all-options language based only on an EP label.

VI.i.1.B.1.k · Invite applicable ancillary benefits with the proper forms

Check the source’s benefit/form list for VR&E, health care, automobile, adapted housing, clothing allowance, Chapter 35, special monthly pension, nursing-home status, dependency, medical expenses, accrued benefits and substitution as applicable. Do not duplicate dependency solicitation when already decided or developed. An invitation is not a grant.

VI.i.1.B.1.l · Initial-grant PCGL notices include the specified legacy text

Use the prescribed Planning Your Legacy material for the applicable initial compensation or pension grant prepared through PCGL. Preserve the exact required text/link in the official notice rather than substituting a generic promotional paragraph.

VI.i.1.B.1.m · Some survivor notices require grief-support information

The source identifies initial survivor claims and certain death-within-two-years, month-of-death and substitution situations requiring the specified grief-resource text when not already provided, with additional suicide-related information when applicable. These are survivor-specific notice requirements, not a reason to insert bereavement text into every compensation letter.

VI.i.1.B.1.n · Special benefit adjustments have additional notice rules

Offsets, elections, apportionments, fiduciary cases, hospitalization, incarceration and income/net-worth decisions may require details from their linked procedures. Use the actual reason for the adjustment to choose the explanation and enclosures.

VI.i.1.B.1.o · Release the complete approved notice to the right recipients

Verify completeness, accuracy, actual mailing date and current address or appointed fiduciary, with required beneficiary and representative copies. Use Package Manager for the prescribed centralized printing/mailing and eFolder record. FTI packages use the separate secure local process. An intended mailing date is not verified dispatch.

VI.i.1.B.1.p · Correct a letter that misstates the actual rating

If a notice says service connection was granted but the actual rating denied it, issue a corrected notice with the applicable review period beginning from the corrected mailing date. The erroneous letter alone did not establish service connection, so correcting it is not severance. Verify the actual rating; this does not allow reversal of a real favorable decision without its proper process.

VI.i.1.B.1.q · Do not release unfinished drafts

A draft decision that has not been finalized is not an approved claimant communication. Complete the required review and authorization before sharing the actual decision notice.

VI.i.1.B.1.r · Backfill alone does not create a new notice requirement

A backfill with no substantive new decision does not require another decision notice. Confirm that the work truly does not decide a new issue, alter entitlement or correct a material notice error before using that exception.

VI.i.1.B.2.a · Federal tax information needs protected handling

Determine whether the package contains FTI before ordinary generation or mailing. Its preparation, authorization, disclosure, imaging and retention use the protected process; routine centralized printing is not interchangeable with that process.

VI.i.1.B.2.b · Use the secure FTI chain from printing through imaging

Mark every page CONTAINS FTI in bold, print the specified single copy without barcode scanning, and hand directly to the SVSR or secure it with the required movement controls. Verify recipient addresses and permitted disclosure, including a POA executed within the past five years before providing FTI to that representative. This does not mean all POA authority generally expires after five years.

Approved material follows secure local sealing, mail and FTI Capture imaging rather than centralized print. Apply secure storage/movement logs, prescribed handling of rejected material and a minimum 90-day retention after imaging before authorized disposition. Use the original table for each staff handoff; do not place tax information in this personal tool.

VI.i.1.B.3.a · RADL follows promulgation and must produce an adequate notice

Promulgate the award before generating RADL, including applicable confirmed-and-continued and nonoriginal-denial cases. If RADL remains inadequate after appropriate free text, use PCGL and the prescribed Non-ADL routing. Pension/PMC generally uses different handling, subject to the limited listed service-eligibility cases; burial ADL is separate.

VI.i.1.B.3.b · Check the listed EPs and their exceptions

The source lists the usual supported compensation EPs, including 010, 020, 030, 040, 110, 130, 160 ADL, 290, 310, 320, 600 and the specified special EPs; legacy 070/170 and limited pension military-ineligibility cases have qualifications. A listed EP still must pass the substantive exclusions in the next block.

VI.i.1.B.3.c · Certain decisions need a different notice tool

Unlisted or unsupported cases, pension/dual cases outside the limited exception, final incompetency decisions and certain unusual ancillary/contested cases do not use routine RADL. Use the applicable PCGL/manual procedure; Audit Error Worksheets use the AEW Assistant. EP 020 by itself does not make final incompetency suitable for RADL.

VI.i.1.B.3.d · Review every generated section against the award

Check the benefit decisions and combined percentages, dependency reasons/law/unmet elements/favorable findings, monthly total/withheld/paid amounts and change dates/reasons, evidence, review rights, payment interactions, ancillary benefits and contact information. Generated text can still be incomplete or inconsistent with the actual decision.

VI.i.1.B.3.e · Preview and authorize the actual generated letter

After award generation, use the proper letter-generation fields, including dependency and soliciting-evidence free text where appropriate. Preview the complete notice and route for SVSR review. Generation alone does not establish that it is accurate, approved or sent.

VI.i.1.B.3.f · Dependency letter features do not replace upfront development

The ability to request dependency information while creating a letter does not excuse required initial development. It also does not override the modern 21-686c restriction on developing missing information the form specifically requested. Apply the actual initial-versus-promulgation dependency rule.

VI.i.1.B.3.g · Solicit unclaimed benefits only under the applicable rule

Use the appropriate procedure when the evidence raises a potential unclaimed benefit and notice should invite an application. A letter-generation option is not authority to establish entitlement or add an unsupported claim automatically.

VI.i.1.B.3.h · Add authorization evidence that the rating did not cover

Enter evidence supporting the separate authorization action in the appropriate evidence list. A rating’s attachment can explain that rating, but does not silently supply the evidence or reasons for an independent dependency or administrative determination.

VI.i.1.B.3.i · Use free text to explain necessary case facts

Add text when required or when it materially helps the claimant understand the actual decision and meets notice requirements. Keep it relevant and accurate; unnecessary boilerplate can obscure rather than explain the action.

VI.i.1.B.4.a · Contested claims use their special review period

Use the specified contested-claim PCGL/exhibit and correct review instructions, including the 60-day period from the letter. Do not leave ordinary one-year or unrestricted review-option language in a simultaneously contested notice. Verify the actual contested-claim route and affected recipients.

VII.i.1.C.1.a · Process eligible dependencies while rating remains pending

Perform initial dependency screening/development under A.5.b. If the Veteran already has at least a 30-percent combined evaluation, process supported additional dependents without waiting for the concurrent rating decision.

VII.i.1.C.1.b · A first qualifying rating requires a dependency check

When rating first raises the combined evaluation from below 30 percent to at least 30 percent, review evidence of dependents and any pending dependency claim. Without an indicated dependent, provide the required potential-benefit/form notice. An ordinary separate EP 130 remains for its own decision/transfer; do not close an unexpired tracked item whose requested evidence has not arrived.

Original-claim and verified designated-office cases can add supported dependents with rating; incomplete entitlement uses C.1.d. Apply the prescribed-form requirement when the rating-triggering claim arrived on or after March 24, 2015, with the source’s older-claim exception.

VII.i.1.C.1.c · No pending dependency claim has its own promulgation table

If never claimed, try authorized telephone completion of 21-686c/21-674; unsuccessful contact leads to a form invitation without holding an EP. Prior claims with complete current evidence may support adding a dependent; stale status requires verification. The table’s less-than/more-than-eight-year rows require care at the exact boundary under A.5.c.

Other missing information calls for telephone contact unless it is a specified omission on a modern 21-686c. Documentary proof is requested through the notice rather than a call solely for the document. Explain a proved unrecognized relationship. Responses supplying missing proof/information need the prescribed 21-686c; otherwise use the application-request route. Do not keep an EP solely waiting for these no-current-claim responses.

VII.i.1.C.1.d · Pending dependencies discovered at qualifying promulgation differ from initial development

This table applies when first reaching 30 percent, dependency is pending, entitlement is incomplete, and there is no separate EP 130 or the verified designated-office exception applies. For specified modern-form omissions, decide without routine telephone development; other missing information requires the prescribed call, while documentary proof does not call for telephone development solely to obtain it.

Ensure necessary initial development is complete before the appropriate missing-evidence or established-ineligibility decision and notice. The inability to obtain life-event evidence preserves assistance with the custodian. Do not generalize this late-promulgation exception to ordinary initial development.

VII.i.1.C.1.e · Dependency information is required with later qualifying ratings too

Each applicable rating at at least 30 percent identifies paid dependents and potential additional-dependent benefits, including increases/new service connection, IU, SMC and an earlier qualifying date even without a combined-percent change. Avoid duplicate solicitation when the notice already requests the evidence or decides dependency with rating.

VII.i.1.C.1.f · Verify RADL dependency text and fields

RADL generally inserts the potential-benefit/forms/online-claim information, with the duplicate-solicitation exceptions. Use the actual dependency decision/status, favorable-findings, evidence and development fields or required free text. When EP 130 is pending, use the prescribed VBMS development letter where appropriate. These features do not override the modern-form prohibition on developing specifically requested omissions.

VII.i.1.C.2.a · A timely life-event claim can use the event date

For an already eligible compensation Veteran, an accepted spouse/birth/adoption claim within the applicable one-year event period can use the event date, with required evidence timely furnished under the actual request rules. Stepchild status uses the later of marriage and household membership. An ordinary parent claim uses the later of claim receipt and financial dependency. A late life-event claim can still have a qualifying later-rating opportunity.

The modern 21-686c prohibition on developing specified omissions remains. A resulting denial followed by timely 20-0995 with missing evidence invokes the C.2/3.2500(h) preservation rules; do not automatically replace an otherwise protected date with supplemental receipt. All 3.401(b) entitlement conditions and the separate payment-commencement rule still apply.

VII.i.1.C.2.b · The birth example preserves an event within the year

The example has qualifying compensation from April 2010, a December 23, 2010 birth and a completed August 12, 2011 claim. Because the claim timely establishes the child, the source grants entitlement from the birth date. It does not use the earlier general dependency invitation as a reason to lose this later life-event opportunity.

VII.i.1.C.2.c · A first qualifying rating limits the dependent award

For dependency granted with or pending at the first qualifying rating, compare the effective date of the evaluation of at least 30 percent with the applicable dependency event in C.2.d and use the later date. The date entitlement begins and the date payment becomes payable remain distinct.

VII.i.1.C.2.d · A timely qualifying-rating response can preserve its date

For a complete response within one year of the applicable qualifying-rating notice, ordinarily use the later of that evaluation effective date and the dependency event. The event is marriage, birth, adoption, financial dependency, or the later marriage/household date for a stepchild. A dependency denial followed by 20-0995 uses the 3.2500(h) exception instead of a generic new-response rule.

Another exception applies when qualifying compensation already existed by the dependency event, before the later rating, and the dependent claim also meets the event’s one-year period: the event date can precede that later rating date. Reconcile all 3.401(b) latest-date conditions, timely evidence and the underlying award. School attendance and historical same-sex-spouse dates have separate provisions.

VII.i.1.C.2.e · Sharp can apply to later qualifying ratings

Do not limit the qualifying-rating date rule to the first time the Veteran reaches 30 percent. Sharp extends the described opportunity to applicable later ratings; during routine review, correct an award when a qualifying decision completed on or after October 15, 2009 supports an earlier dependent date. Pension and later decisions that only confirm/continue evaluations or deny service connection do not qualify.

VII.i.1.C.2.f · A late response still needs the other date opportunities checked

An untimely response to the relevant rating notice generally cannot predate that response’s receipt. Before applying that limit, check a more recent qualifying rating within the past year and the separate timely life-event exception. Include the last day of the legally verified period and actual workday/extension rules rather than treating the anniversary as automatically late.

VII.i.1.C.2.g · A later IU rating can change an existing spouse date

The first example awards a long-married Veteran’s spouse from the late June 15, 2016 dependency claim. A later November 2019 IU rating effective September 18, 2013 then supports adjusting the spouse award back to September 18, 2013. The example shows why an existing dependent award does not end review of a later qualifying rating’s effect.

VII.i.1.C.2.h · Historical same-sex-marriage dates require the applicable route

The validity process is now the same as for opposite-sex marriages. A dependency claim pending/open September 4, 2013 uses ordinary 3.401 rules as though the former prohibition had not existed. For later claims, marriages after that date and timely claims for earlier marriages use ordinary rules; a late claim for a preexisting marriage can compare an advantageous 3.114 liberalizing-law date.

Under the liberalizing route, apply actual continuous eligibility and the claimant-request/VA-initiative distinction; the listed limits prevent going before September 4, 2013 or beyond the specified one-year lookback. Those limits do not cap a valid ordinary-rule date before 2013. If a spouse was awarded with the initial qualifying evaluation and a subsequent rating establishes qualification earlier, the later of the new qualifying date and marriage can apply even before September 2013.

VII.i.1.C.2.i · The six examples distinguish ordinary dates from liberalizing relief

The first two examples use March 12, 2013 marriage dates through ordinary timely/pending-claim rules. A February 2012 marriage claimed January 1, 2014 uses September 4, 2013 liberalizing relief; the same older marriage claimed January 1, 2015 uses a January 1, 2014 lookback. A timely claim for an October 1, 2013 marriage uses that marriage date.

In the sixth example, the spouse was initially paid with an April 29, 2013 qualifying award; a later rating makes the Veteran qualify from October 3, 2011, so the February 8, 2012 marriage becomes the applicable spouse date under Sharp. These examples do not establish a blanket 2013 earliest-date rule or waive other eligibility conditions.

VII.i.1.C.3.a · Notify every adjustment and coordinate affected Chapter 31 benefits

Provide the required notice for a dependent adjustment; unconfirmed third-party adverse information requires advance notice. When Chapter 31 is affected, notify the responsible VR&E office through authorized channels with the specified claim, dependent, reason, event and award-date details, retaining the referral in the eFolder.

VII.i.1.C.3.b · Spousal separation alone does not end compensation dependency

Do not remove a compensation spouse merely because of estrangement or require that spouse’s address solely for the separation. Review any actual apportionment and distinct stepchild rules. A child living elsewhere still requires the custodian’s identifying/address information.

VII.i.1.C.3.c · A proposed reduction does not yet remove dependency entitlement

Continue dependency adjudication while severance or reduction under 3.105(d)/(e) is only proposed. Use the current entitlement until the actual authorized reduction takes effect; a proposal is not already a final award change.

VII.i.1.C.3.d · Parent and school changes have their own dates

Use VII.i.4.B.7 for a parent’s lost financial dependency and VII.ii.1.B.4.c for unscheduled school termination. Their entitlement-ending facts and dates must be established under those rules rather than borrowed from a spouse divorce example.

VII.i.1.C.3.e · Another child’s award may require separate advance notice

When a change to one award adversely affects another child’s rate, provide the required proposal to that child or custodian. A favorable retroactive action for one person is not permission to reduce a different payee without that person’s applicable protection.

VII.i.1.C.3.f · The DIC example illustrates effects on another payee

The source’s child-annulment/restoration and schoolchild examples are DIC-specific: an available difference may be payable retroactively while a reduction to another payee requires the described proposal and later full-rate date. Child marriage ending by ordinary divorce/death differs from a void/annulled marriage. Do not import this DIC rate sequence into compensation.

VII.i.1.C.4.a · The beneficiary report can permit contemporaneous notice

A qualifying beneficiary/custodian report of loss can fit the no-advance-notice rule, subject to 3.103 and the oral-report requirements in 3.217. Verify source, clarity and documentation; a representative or other third-party report is not automatically the same exception.

VII.i.1.C.4.b · End-of-month rules distinguish the last payable day

For the listed compensation/current-pension/DIC spouse and child events, the event month’s last day is generally payable and removal begins the first day of the next month. Check the actual divorce/death/marriage/adoption/school rule; school cessation is not always the claimed event date. A compensation adopted-out adjustment cannot precede September 14, 2015. Verify recorded death data.

VII.i.1.C.4.c · Other reasons and historical benefits use different dates

For post-October 1, 1982 losses outside the listed end-of-month reasons, the applicable adjustment can use the actual event date. Older events and Section 306/old-law pension use the separate historical rules. Do not apply a modern compensation next-month shortcut to every loss of dependency.

VII.i.1.C.4.d · Negative paternity results do not rule out a stepchild

First determine whether continued stepchild entitlement exists and address any apportionment separately. If removal is proper, the event is when the beneficiary received the test results, not the laboratory date. Do not demand a test copy absent a validity, conflict or fraud reason for verification.

VII.i.1.C.4.e · A missing date needs contact and a controlled retroactive proposal

Attempt telephone contact for missing event date/location, except that location omitted from 21-0538 does not require a call merely because that form never requested it; a well-known city can suffice without a State. If only location remains missing after the proper attempt, adjust without further location development.

If the actual date remains unobtainable, apply the verified last-paid-date adjustment under the applicable report/notice authority and propose the further retroactive change from the first of the month following the last verified entitlement. Allow 60 days to provide the date and explain the potential overpayment. Do not invent an event date or close the proposal simply because the initial adjustment is made.

VII.i.1.C.4.f · Separate child awards and apportionments change the analysis

A DIC child’s separate marriage/death-related award change may not affect the surviving spouse’s award. An apportioned-child situation can have a different adjustment from an ordinary end-of-month spouse award. Verify the actual benefit and payee before applying a standard compensation date.

VII.i.1.C.4.g · Use an earlier existing child cutoff when applicable

For a child’s death or marriage, compare the applicable next-month event date with the actual scheduled 18th/23rd birthday or school cutoff and use the earlier required date. If school stopped before marriage, review the last attendance and 3.667(c). Do not extend payment to a later event merely because it was reported later.

VII.i.1.C.4.h · Pension government-care limits remain pension rules

Loss of the last dependent while in government care invokes different Section 306/old-law and current-pension rules. The current-pension nursing/domiciliary $90 limitation and first-fourth-month sequence have their own due-process conditions; hospitalization has a distinct exception. These are not compensation dependent-removal rates.

VII.i.1.C.4.i · An existing dependent component cannot simply be renounced

A claimant can choose not to seek additional dependents, but 3.106 does not permit renouncing only that portion of an already running award. Determine whether a legal entitlement-ending event actually occurred before removing the dependent.

VII.i.1.B.1.a · How recurring verification is selected

The monthly computer process selects compensation spouse/child verification on 21-0538 and survivor verification on 21P-0537, generally eight years after the initial award month. It creates a 60-day diary; the actual request and response still need review.

VII.i.1.B.1.b · Explain the response period and affected dependents

The initial cover letter gives 60 days and explains that failure to verify can reduce or stop benefits. The compensation enclosure names the particular dependents whose status is being verified; preserve that scope for later action.

VII.i.1.B.1.c · Why status must be rechecked

Periodic verification limits large overpayments from unreported changes. Apply the eligibility-certification and adjustment rules in 3.652 and 3.500(v); the diary is a control, not evidence that eligibility actually ended.

VII.i.1.B.1.d · Handle a letter-not-sent work item

For the 800 work item, actually send the form, cover letter and required enclosure. Set code 30 to expire in the month after the 60-day period measured from the later of work-item issuance and actual request mailing, then clear the 800. Do not calculate from an unsent letter.

VII.i.1.B.2.a · A returned 21-0538 starts verification review

Centralized receipt creates EP 330 Dependency Verification Review. Review the contents and actual prior processing; automatic establishment does not establish completeness or authorize an award change.

VII.i.1.B.2.b · Telephone verification needs a record

A direct telephone response must contain the information required by the form. Establish the appropriate EP 330 and preserve the contact on 27-0820 in the eFolder; a vague call note is insufficient.

VII.i.1.B.2.c · Sort compensation verification by completeness and change

Cancel an unexpired diary. A complete unchanged response requires a permanent Veteran-level note and the appropriate EP 330 clearance. A change uses EP 130 Dependency Verification - 0538 with actual form receipt as the date of claim, cancelling a pending 330. Incomplete information goes to 2.f; missing only an event date goes to 3.d.

VII.i.1.B.2.d · Survivor form processing has its own rules

21P-0537 verifies a survivor's status under its applicable EP 330 process. Review the form and existing controls, and distinguish complete unchanged status from reported changes or incomplete evidence. Do not apply compensation's later 90-day sequence to this survivor branch.

VII.i.1.B.2.e · Route a survivor change through the correct control

Use the survivor/PMC EP and award instructions for a reported 21P-0537 change, including actual receipt and existing control review. Reconcile relevant corporate information under 6.a and apply the survivor-specific event and remarriage rules before adjusting.

VII.i.1.B.2.f · An incomplete response before a proposal gets its own request

Cancel EP 330, establish EP 130 for 30 days and try to obtain the missing information or confirm an unsigned form by telephone. Document success or the unsuccessful attempt. A signed form may establish a particular dependent's loss even while other information is missing: adjust only the fully supported change and keep the EP pending. Return the form for completion within 30 days.

A timely complete response goes to 4.b Step 22, cancelling any new 330. Continued nonresponse/incompleteness moves to the proposal sequence, clearing EP 130 unless unrelated issues still require it. The survivor branch uses its own corresponding steps; do not immediately impose the final retroactive reduction merely because this 30-day request expired.

VII.i.1.B.2.g · Review education and rehabilitation consequences

Certain marital/dependent changes affect Chapter 35 or Chapter 31. Notify the responsible RPO or VR&E office through authorized VA channels with the required beneficiary, dependent, event and award-date details, and retain the referral. This reference tool does not send that communication.

VII.i.1.B.3.a · Direct beneficiary reports still require proper notice

The source distinguishes beneficiary-reported changes from reductions requiring a proposal. Its reference to action without due process does not remove contemporaneous notice or the conditions in 3.103 and 3.217. Verify the report's actual source, documentation and any disputed oral statement before relying on the exception.

VII.i.1.B.3.b · Use actual event dates for reported compensation changes

Apply VII.i.1.C.4 to the established change, enter the required award remarks and provide notice. If a spouse died or divorced the Veteran and stepchildren are involved, separately review their continued household eligibility; the spouse's removal alone does not answer that question.

VII.i.1.B.3.c · A survivor's remarriage does not always end DIC

Check the remarriage exceptions before stopping survivor benefits: the source includes remarriage after age 57, and after age 55 when the remarriage occurred January 5, 2021 or later. Apply the actual survivor benefit and dates rather than the living-Veteran compensation spouse rules.

VII.i.1.B.3.d · A missing event date before proposal uses 30 days, then a proposal

Attempt telephone clarification. If the date remains missing, remove the identified former dependent at the actual last-paid date, use known event dates for other changes, provide remarks/notice and return the form with 30 days to supply the date under EP 130. A response establishing the date permits correction under C.4.

If the date remains missing after that request, clear the applicable 130 and establish EP 600 with Potential Under/Overpayment and a 65-day proposal control. Propose the further adjustment from the first month after last verified status and explain possible debt. Before final action, search the record for the latest actual verification and review notice/hearing protections. This missing-date sequence does not add the ordinary nonresponse 90-day stage.

VII.i.1.B.3.e · A survivor's missing event date has a separate sequence

For a survivor's otherwise complete response with a missing event date, use the specified suspension/control and return the form with 30 days for completion. If unresolved, continue through the survivor sequence in 4.e, rather than the compensation last-paid-date/90-day process.

VII.i.1.B.4.a · Review the expired initial diary

An uncancelled initial diary leads to the prescribed manual EP 130 review. Confirm actual mailing and search for evidence; an expired diary may reflect a processing delay rather than actual nonresponse.

VII.i.1.B.4.b · Ordinary compensation nonresponse has several protected stages

Search the eFolder and mail portal for the form or documented personal verification. A complete substitute 21-686c can qualify if received no earlier than one year before the EP 130 date and personally signed by the Veteran/fiduciary or based on a clearly documented direct VA interview. A representative-signed form does not qualify. Account for all requested dependents and inspect prior processing before clearing duplicates or taking credit; prior manual RO/RO 372 clearance does not justify another credit.

Confirm EP 130 and Potential Under/Overpayment, then attempt telephone verification. Document complete responses and use Step 22; if the claimant can complete a partial contact, allow through the next business day. Missing only an event date uses 3.d. After unsuccessful contact, clear 130, establish 600, send the proposal and set 65-day control. The proposal concerns the named dependents; an unverified spouse also brings the affected stepchildren into scope even if added after the original request.

A complete proposal response goes to Step 22; incomplete and missing-date responses go to 4.c and 4.d. With no qualifying response after the actual protections expire, normally remove the affected dependent component at the verified last-paid date and give an additional 90 days before the further retroactive adjustment. Set code 30 to expire in the month after those 90 days. If all named dependents were already removed by age/school cutoff before proposal expiration, the source skips that intermediate stage and proceeds to the supported retroactive action.

Review verification whenever received. At the 810 expiration without response, use EP 130 with the actual work-item date and Potential Under/Overpayment. The further retroactive date is the first month after the latest actual verification of the affected status, not automatically initial award. Step 22 continues unchanged payments or restores verified dependents from the previous reduction, with notice and separate retired-pay review. Accept later verification regardless of elapsed time; no 20-0995 is required for this verification restoration. New relationships and unverified people still require their own proof.

VII.i.1.B.4.c · Incomplete evidence during a proposal gets 30 days under that proposal

Attempt direct completion. If unsuccessful, retain EP 600, apply any completely established loss on a signed form under C.4, and return the incomplete or unsigned form with 30 days for completion. A complete response goes to Step 22. Continued nonresponse/incompleteness permits the properly supported retroactive action after the actual protections; do not start the ordinary additional 90-day stage here.

VII.i.1.B.4.d · Missing event date during a proposal uses its existing notice stage

Attempt to obtain the date. If unsuccessful, make the prescribed last-paid-date adjustment, address other known changes, and return the form for 30 days under EP 130 with notice. An actual date permits C.4 correction. If still missing after the request, apply the supported retroactive first-month-after-last-verification action; do not invent another initial proposal or ordinary 90-day stage.

VII.i.1.B.4.e · Survivor nonresponse is a separate table

Review returned forms/substitutes, attempts to contact, controls and existing processing under the survivor-specific steps. The proposal uses its actual response period; continued nonresponse can lead to the specified retroactive survivor adjustment without the compensation additional 90 days. Later required verification is considered without demanding a supplemental claim merely because time passed. Apply actual remarriage exceptions and survivor award facts.

VII.i.1.B.4.f · An apportionee has separate protection

Failure by the Veteran to return verification does not automatically change an apportionment. If the apportionment amount must decrease, provide the affected payee the required separate proposed-action notice before that reduction.

VII.i.1.B.5.a · Resending to a correct address restarts the initial request

Cancel the returned-mail EP 330, correct the address, resend the initial form/notice and reset code 30 to the month after 60 days from the new mailing. Preserve evidence of the actual request and correct address.

VII.i.1.B.5.b · Search when the correct address is unknown

Cancel the returned-mail 330 and follow the identified address-search rules in II.i.2.C.6. If a new address is found, use 5.a and restart the initial request. Returned mail alone does not establish loss of entitlement.

VII.i.1.B.6.a · Update the corporate survivor information accurately

Use the 21P-0537 information to correct the applicable corporate name, birth-date and SSN fields under the table's instructions. This is survivor-form data maintenance, not authority to infer new compensation entitlement from an unverified field.

VII.i.2.A.1.a · Use the law for the relevant place and time

Validity depends on the jurisdiction where the parties resided at marriage or when entitlement arose under 3.1(j). Establish those facts and the actual governing law; current residence or ceremony location alone may not resolve the question.

VII.i.2.A.1.b · A known undissolved marriage is an impediment

The parties must be free to marry. Do not presume the latest marriage valid over a known valid prior marriage that was never legally dissolved. Resolve finality under the controlling jurisdiction, including any relevant waiting period.

VII.i.2.A.1.c · Deemed-valid marriage is a survivor exception

The deemed-valid doctrine can apply to an otherwise qualifying survivor claim under its separate requirements. It does not make an invalid marriage eligible for additional compensation while the Veteran is alive.

VII.i.2.A.2.a · An adequate signed statement ordinarily suffices

Accept the prescribed dependency form's adequate marriage information, including authorized representative and documented direct-interview exceptions. A marriage certificate is not routinely required in every compensation spouse claim.

VII.i.2.A.2.b · Identify a real trigger for documentary evidence

Documents are required for residence outside a State, unresolved material conflicts/questionable validity, or reasonable fraud concerns under 3.204(a)(2). Reconcile existing information and telephone clarification where appropriate. Missing past-residence details alone are not a trigger; the APO/FPO plus United States home-city qualification applies.

VII.i.2.A.2.c · Use adequate primary marriage evidence

A public or church marriage record must identify the parties and marriage date/place, including prior-marriage counts if the record shows them. Review adequacy and consistency instead of requiring an unnecessarily specific certificate format.

VII.i.2.A.2.d · Use ordered alternatives if primary proof is unavailable

Consider a service-department report for an in-service marriage, officiant statement, genuine original certificate, two or more ceremony witnesses, then other adequate secondary proof. Do not demand every tier. Encourage appropriate copies because irreplaceable originals may not be returned.

VII.i.2.A.3.a · Develop proof under the actual form's rules

Telephone first where development is required; if contact fails or proof cannot be supplied within 24 hours, write. For an outside-State claimant using a September 2018 or later 21-686c that explicitly required the missing certificate, deny without routine additional development, subject to the inability-to-obtain assistance in 3.b and applicable intake safeguards.

VII.i.2.A.3.b · Help when the required life-event record cannot be obtained

Assist with identifying and requesting necessary marriage or other life-event records when inability to obtain them is reported. The modern form's attachment instructions do not cancel this records-assistance obligation.

VII.i.2.A.4.a · Do not routinely demand all prior divorce records

Require termination documents for the particular unresolved material conflict after reviewing existing records and attempting clarification. Do not turn a prior marriage history into a search for every old decree. Removal of an existing dependent has its separate no-prescribed-form rules.

VII.i.2.A.4.b · Verify actual final termination

Use a certified final divorce/annulment decree or authorized abstract with its legal effect. An interlocutory decree does not terminate the marriage. Review finality and controlling law; 3.206 limits when VA questions a facially regular divorce and governs the relevant jurisdictional inquiry.

VII.i.2.A.4.c · Assist when termination records cannot be located

Provide the required non-Federal records assistance. If a divorce cannot be located after the prescribed efforts, follow the source's direction to obtain a new decree; do not simply presume freedom to marry. A survivor unable to prove a Veteran's prior termination may need the separate deemed-valid analysis.

VII.i.2.A.5.a · Death proof is needed for an actual unresolved conflict

Try to reconcile conflicting information about a prior spouse's death; obtain documents when the conflict or reasonable fraud concern requires it. Use telephone then written development if proof cannot be provided within 24 hours. Routine dependent removal does not always require a death certificate.

VII.i.2.A.5.b · Use the permitted primary death evidence

Accept the adequate public death/coroner record or the specified official medical, service-department, consular or United States government report, as applicable. Official reports must establish the actual fact and date of death with the required official authentication.

VII.i.2.A.5.c · Explain why primary proof is unavailable before substitutes

Authorized secondary evidence includes the specified Federal finding absent contrary evidence, or a sufficiently detailed witness statement from someone who saw the body and knew the person's identity. A general report that someone heard of the death is not that personal knowledge.

VII.i.2.A.5.d · A finding of death needs supported adjudication

When primary and secondary proof are unavailable, a finding of death requires the stated preponderance of competent evidence and an administrative decision. Absence or speculation alone is insufficient.

VII.i.2.A.6.a · Not every defect makes a marriage void

A legal defect, including age, does not automatically mean the marriage never existed. Determine whether the controlling law actually makes it void or provides another legal consequence before selecting an award action.

VII.i.2.A.6.b · Understand what void means

A void marriage has no legal validity under the applicable law. Establish that legal status from actual facts and authority instead of using the word as a synonym for an unhappy, separated or disputed marriage.

VII.i.2.A.6.c · An actually void marriage needs no extra dissolution

Once properly established as void, the parties need not obtain an additional divorce merely to end that nonexistent legal marriage. Any survivor restoration remains subject to its separate rules.

VII.i.2.A.6.d · Develop an allegation and obtain Counsel's opinion

Collect the relevant facts and personal certified statements where possible. Submit the supported legal question to District Counsel. Under this block the legal opinion constitutes VA's decision; a separate administrative decision is not required.

VII.i.2.A.6.e · Court-declared void marriages affect running awards under a specific rule

Treat the court declaration as an annulment and use its actual declaration date. Develop conflicting dates; if unresolved, the source directs removal from the original date the spouse was added. Verify actual evidence and notice authority before any retroactive award, rather than guessing a declaration date.

VII.i.2.A.7.a · Ending an impediment later may create a later marriage

A prior undissolved marriage prevents validity while it continues. After dissolution, continued marital cohabitation may establish common-law marriage in a recognizing jurisdiction if its elements are met. Other jurisdictions require their own analysis and possibly Counsel; no universal rule backdates validity to the earlier ceremony.

VII.i.2.B.1.a · Common-law marriage depends on legal recognition

An agreement and relationship without ceremony may create marriage where the applicable law recognizes it. Apply the same relevant rules to same-sex relationships; cohabitation alone is not a universal marriage rule.

VII.i.2.B.1.b · Registration is not always required

Registration can establish proof from the registration date where permitted, but its absence does not automatically defeat a common-law marriage. Nor does registration necessarily establish the earliest date the relationship legally qualified.

VII.i.2.B.1.c · A valid common-law marriage remains a marriage

Once validly established, it has the same standing as a ceremonial marriage and survives a move to another jurisdiction. There is no common-law divorce; proper legal termination is still necessary.

VII.i.2.B.1.d · Apply the jurisdiction's elements and proof standard

Develop agreement, cohabitation and public marital representation as required by the actual State law. An agreement may be inferred under that law despite denial of an express agreement. Burden/Coleman require the applicable State evidentiary standard, not automatically the usual VA evidentiary balance.

VII.i.2.B.1.e · Public conduct helps establish the relationship

Investigate how the parties represented the relationship to others and whether their community understood them to be married. Personal observation and concrete conduct matter more than an unsupported label on a form.

VII.i.2.B.1.f · Use relevant corroboration without a surname requirement

Leases, bank accounts, taxes, insurance, utilities and employment records may show public marital representation. No universal requirement forces the parties to share a last name; evaluate the actual jurisdiction's elements.

VII.i.2.B.1.g · The parties must explain the relationship's facts

Their statements should describe the agreement, when cohabitation began, its periods, residence places/dates and children of the relationship. Those details allow the reviewer to apply the law for the correct time and place.

VII.i.2.B.1.h · Observers need personal knowledge

Obtain statements from at least two people with personal observations of cohabitation, residences, public marital representation and community acceptance. Ask what they observed and when rather than accepting a bare conclusion that the couple was married.

VII.i.2.B.2.a · Know when common-law development is relevant

Develop an expressly alleged common-law marriage, or a potentially qualifying relationship after a failed ceremony where the parties lived together under recognizing law. First identify the facts making that legal theory relevant.

VII.i.2.B.2.b · Use the forms and supporting records for the living parties

For a living Veteran, obtain 21-4170 from both the Veteran and claimed spouse and 21P-4171 from at least two observers. Obtain birth records for children of the relationship identifying both parents. A death claim uses the living survivor's statement and its own corresponding evidence; do not demand a deceased person's new signature.

VII.i.2.B.3.a · Read the jurisdiction table as dated legal guidance

The source's table contains recognition restrictions and historical cutoff dates; a cutoff generally concerns when a marriage had to be established. Special entries such as New Hampshire and Utah need their actual legal conditions. Verify the official law for the real jurisdiction and dates rather than treating this dated table as a universal current-state eligibility calculator.

VII.i.2.B.4.a · Research foreign law in the prescribed order

First check SSA POMS for an OGC determination. If none applies, use reputable sources, preferably official government law, and retain the findings. Refer unresolved questions to Counsel and document the inquiry on 27-0820.

VII.i.2.B.5.a · A living Veteran cannot use the survivor deemed-valid exception

If the developed facts show only nonrecognizing jurisdictions throughout the alleged relationship, disallowance need not await Counsel. The merits decision still needs the administrative procedure in 7.a. A current nonrecognizing address alone does not establish this outcome.

VII.i.2.B.5.b · A survivor may need a deemed-valid inquiry

In a survivor claim, lack of legal recognition may require development of the separate deemed-valid conditions rather than immediate rejection. This exception does not apply to a living Veteran's additional spouse compensation.

VII.i.2.B.5.c · Resolve knowledge and every other deemed-valid condition

For the survivor exception, develop knowledge of the legal impediment and all other required elements, and prepare the supported administrative decision. A claimant's statement must be assessed with contrary evidence and the actual survivor-law requirements.

VII.i.2.B.6.a · A disavowed relationship may still require development

Where a claimed common-law marriage would affect benefits and a party now denies it, investigate the actual relationship and governing law. The denial is evidence; it does not erase prior marital conduct automatically.

VII.i.2.B.6.b · Get the facts behind competing statements

Develop agreement, public conduct, cohabitation, time and place, using additional records or field investigation when necessary. Do not impose an adverse marriage finding solely from an isolated inconsistent label.

VII.i.2.B.6.c · Use the supported decision and notice process

A marriage finding affecting existing benefits requires the proper two-signature administrative decision and applicable adverse notice. Keep the merits analysis separate from the authority to reduce an existing payment.

VII.i.2.B.7.a · Distinguish a merits decision from missing proof

Recognition or rejection on the merits requires a two-signature administrative decision using the prescribed issue wording and the State's standard of proof. The source's 'Deemed Valid Common Law Marriage' wording does not import survivor-only entitlement into a living claim. A denial solely for failure to furnish requested proof does not require this merits administrative decision.

VII.i.3.A.1.a · A qualifying child relationship is required

Biological, adopted and stepchild relationships have specific conditions. Adoption or stepchild status acquired between 18 and 23 may qualify for school-based benefits under 3.57(a)(2). Resolve the actual legal relationship, timing and household conditions before payment.

VII.i.3.A.1.b · Review age, school or incapacity conditions

A qualifying unmarried child is under 18, permanently incapable of self-support before 18, or in qualifying approved education from 18 until the applicable cutoff no later than 23. Establish stepchild relationship before incapacity analysis. The regulation includes biological children whose parents were unmarried; the manual's abbreviated school wording should not be read to exclude them.

VII.i.3.A.1.c · Marriage affects child eligibility even before 18

The unmarried condition applies even to a minor. An ended or allegedly void marriage requires the specific restoration exceptions in VII.i.3.C and 3.55; divorce does not automatically restore every child's eligibility.

VII.i.3.A.2.a · Use the benefit's qualifying entitlement

Additional compensation ordinarily requires a service-connected evaluation of at least 30 percent. Preserve the appropriate dependency control when a potentially qualifying rating is pending. Pension and survivor child awards have separate conditions.

VII.i.3.A.2.b · A child living elsewhere requires custody information

Obtain the custodian's name and physical or mailing address. Modern-form specifically requested omissions and older-form development differ. For compensation, a certification that whereabouts are unknown plus current court/state-agency support evidence can satisfy the specified exception if all other requirements are met. The survivor custody restriction is separate.

VII.i.3.A.2.c · Active duty does not automatically end child status

A child's military service alone does not eliminate otherwise qualifying age, relationship and marital status. The source also provides the specified stepchild household treatment; review remaining eligibility rather than automatically removing an enlisted child.

VII.i.3.A.3.a · Identify the actual child and event facts

Obtain full name, assigned SSN, date/place of birth and relationship. A well-known city may not need a separately stated State. Apply SSN exceptions and pending-SSA-request development rather than treating every absent number identically.

VII.i.3.A.3.b · An adequate statement often establishes age and relationship

Oral/written information may suffice absent adoption or a 3.204(a)(2) documentary-evidence trigger. The APO/FPO and United States home-city qualification applies. A survivor claim involving an already recognized child may permit concession under the specific source rule.

VII.i.3.A.3.c · Use the relationship-specific evidence rules

Biological parentage, adoption and stepchild status have different requirements in VII.i.3.B. The general age screen does not replace adoption decrees, foreign-adoption conditions or stepchild household review when those rules apply.

VII.i.3.A.3.d · Another agency's determination is evidence, not binding

Consider an age or relationship decision from another agency along with the record, but make the VA determination under the applicable rules. Do not confuse this with the separate binding Federal-court rule for a parent's relationship.

VII.i.3.A.4.a · Check when the public birth record was created

Primary proof is an adequate public birth record or abstract. A record created more than four years after birth must be consistent with the evidence; a newly issued copy of a timely record is not necessarily late-created. Hospital certificates are secondary evidence.

VII.i.3.A.4.b · Secondary birth proof needs identifying facts

Secondary evidence must adequately establish the child's name, birth date/place and the parental identification required by the source, including the mother's name. Resolve unusual or disputed legal parentage under the relationship-specific rules.

VII.i.3.A.4.c · Use the ordered secondary evidence alternatives

The source orders baptismal evidence, official in-service dependency records, physician/midwife statements, properly authenticated family Bible records, disinterested witnesses and other adequate records. A baptismal record created over four years after birth requires consistency and contemporaneous non-benefit corroboration. Do not demand every available alternative.

VII.i.3.A.4.d · Witnesses must explain how they know the birth facts

Two or more disinterested witnesses must give their identities/addresses, birth information and relationship, the child's birth facts and parents, and their source of knowledge. A conclusory statement without that foundation is insufficient.

VII.i.4.A.1.a · Parent includes specific legal relationships

A qualifying parent may be biological, adoptive or someone who stood in the required parental relationship. Apply 3.59 rather than assuming support of any older relative creates parent status.

VII.i.4.A.1.b · Employment does not settle financial dependency

A parent can work or own assets and still require support when reasonable maintenance needs are considered under the applicable rules. Determine actual financial dependency separately; do not use employment alone as disqualification.

VII.i.4.A.1.c · Relationship and need are separate requirements

For dependent-parent compensation, establish both a qualifying parent relationship and financial need. Proof of one does not establish the other, and parent DIC uses its own income rules.

VII.i.4.A.1.d · Avoid unnecessary relationship development

Do not pursue unneeded relationship proof after financial ineligibility is established. In the specified survivor circumstance, an already recognized parent on the Veteran's award can be conceded; apply that exception only within its source scope.

VII.i.4.A.1.e · Use the prescribed signed application

Claims subject to the March 24, 2015 standardized-form requirements need the prescribed completed and signed application. Missing a valid application is an intake issue, not automatically a merits finding against the relationship.

VII.i.4.A.1.f · Telephone clarification is not unlimited form completion

Use telephone development to clarify facts where permitted. Do not treat that permission as authority to complete every parent's required application on their behalf; the specified 21-686c/21-674 procedures have their own exceptions.

VII.i.4.A.2.a · Check which parent benefit is claimed

Additional compensation for a parent generally requires at least a 30 percent service-connected evaluation. There is no additional Veteran pension for a parent. Parent survivor benefits require their separate death-related entitlement.

VII.i.4.A.2.b · Compensation parent need must be shown

Financial dependency is required for the parent component of compensation. Establish it under VII.i.4.B in addition to the legally qualifying relationship.

VII.i.4.A.2.c · Historical death compensation differs from DIC

The source distinguishes parent death compensation involving Veterans who died before January 1, 1957 from the later DIC framework. Do not transplant those historical payment procedures into a living Veteran's compensation award.

VII.i.4.A.2.d · Parent DIC uses countable income

For parent DIC, apply the relevant countable-income rules; net worth and compensation dependency are not interchangeable tests. This is a separate benefit from dependent-parent compensation.

VII.i.4.A.2.e · Compensation need follows 3.250

Dependency for compensation and the specified death-compensation cases follows 3.250 and VII.i.4.B. Apply conclusive or factual need as appropriate, rather than the parent DIC income-rate schedule.

VII.i.4.A.3.a · A specific Federal judgment is binding

A Federal court judgment determining the parental relationship with the United States as a party binds VA even if the case concerned another benefit. This does not make any agency determination or private lawsuit binding.

VII.i.4.A.3.b · Certain relationship findings need an administrative decision

Use the prescribed administrative decision for foster-parent denial, abandonment or contested relationship issues. Apply the source's evidence and signature requirements before treating a disputed relationship as resolved.

VII.i.4.A.4.a · Biological-parent relationship needs documentary proof

Establish the parent relationship with adequate birth evidence. When primary evidence is unavailable, explain why and obtain authorized secondary proof rather than assuming the claimed relationship from support alone.

VII.i.4.A.4.b · Review the birth record’s adequacy

A public birth record naming the parent is primary proof. If created more than four years after birth, it must be consistent with the other evidence. A hospital birth certificate is secondary; the date a copy was issued is not necessarily the record's creation date.

VII.i.4.A.4.c · Some fathers need additional family-relationship evidence

For the father who was unmarried to the mother at birth, obtain two disinterested certified statements concerning the usual family relationship and moral/legal obligations substantially from birth to age 21, marriage or military entry. If insufficient, use field development. A separately qualifying foster relationship may still be relevant.

VII.i.4.A.5.a · A legal adoptive parent can qualify

A qualifying adoptive parent stands in the recognized parent relationship. Establish the legal adoption under the parent rules and then separately address financial need and competing parental roles.

VII.i.4.A.5.b · An adoptive parent requires final adoption proof

Use the final decree or appropriate authorized evidence. An interlocutory decree or placement alone does not establish this adoptive-parent claim, even though some adopted-child claims have different rules. Do not require a petition merely to release an impounded decree.

VII.i.4.A.5.c · Impounded decrees have evidence alternatives

Seek the revised birth certificate plus statements from two disinterested people with personal knowledge, preferably officials. If unavailable or inconclusive, request a field examination instead of demanding unsealing as the only route.

VII.i.4.A.5.d · Foreign adoptive parents have special conditions

For the specified foreign adoption with the parent residing abroad, the Veteran must have been adopted before 21, received at least half support for the required period to 21, marriage or service, and not remained in biological-parent custody unless that parent was the adopter's spouse. These differ from foreign-adopted-child rules.

VII.i.4.A.6.a · Foster-parent timing has two separate requirements

The parental relationship must be continuous for at least one year completed before active-service entry and must begin before the Veteran's 21st birthday. It may complete after 21 if still before service. An institution cannot be the parent.

VII.i.4.A.6.b · Acting in place of a parent means actual parental duties

In loco parentis means occupying the parental role, not merely providing occasional assistance. Develop the real obligations, support, relationship and dates rather than relying on the label foster parent.

VII.i.4.A.6.c · Relinquishment need not be a court termination

A parent can relinquish the role by ceasing support and the parental relationship without a formal termination of rights. Distinguish that from an allegation that the parent refused obligations, which raises abandonment.

VII.i.4.A.6.d · Resolve the existing parent’s role

Where a biological/adoptive parent occupied the same parental role when foster status began, develop whether that role was relinquished. The source's survivor competing-claim procedures may apply even if another potentially entitled parent has not filed; that is a separate benefit context.

VII.i.4.A.6.e · Grandparent examples require actual competing facts

The source's example calls for development of the biological parents' role when a grandparent allegedly acted as parent. Their opportunity to address the facts and any survivor contested-claim treatment cannot be skipped merely because the grandparent provided support.

VII.i.4.A.6.f · A sibling can be a qualifying foster parent

A brother or sister may qualify if the actual parental duties and all age/service timing conditions are met. Kinship alone neither establishes nor excludes the required foster relationship.

VII.i.4.A.6.g · Survivor foster-parent development uses its own table

Check the survivor benefit's financial gate, request 21P-524 with the prescribed 30-day opportunity, review witness and relinquishment evidence, and apply contested-claim and approval requirements as directed. This is not the same control sequence as the living-Veteran compensation branch.

VII.i.4.A.6.h · Compensation foster-parent development starts with need

After establishing financial dependency, send 21P-524 through the Veteran for the alleged foster parent to complete with 30 days to respond. Review an earlier return promptly; develop the continuous year, parental duties and any relinquishment through statements or field evidence. A developed merits denial requires a two-signature administrative decision. Award only after the relationship and other entitlement conditions are established, with notice.

VII.i.4.A.7.a · Only the last qualifying person in each parental role is recognized

Under 3.59, no more than one father and one mother may be recognized. Where successive people qualified, use the last qualifying parental role before the Veteran's last active-service entry, based on actual facts rather than biology alone.

VII.i.4.A.7.b · A biological parent may resume the qualifying role

The example shows a father returning after an uncle acted as parent. If the father again meets the qualifying relationship before service, the later actual role can control. Preserve the timeline and full qualifying period.

VII.i.4.A.7.c · Terminated legal rights do not decide every later role

Termination of parental rights does not automatically bar recognition if the person later occupied the last qualifying parental relationship under the governing rule. Establish actual duties and timing rather than using the old court label alone.

VII.i.4.A.7.d · A biological parent may qualify after adoptive parents die

The example illustrates a biological mother's resumption of the parental role before service after adoptive parents died. Determine the last actual qualifying relationship despite the earlier adoption or rights termination.

VII.i.4.A.8.a · Refusal of parental obligations can defeat entitlement

A biological/adoptive parent who refused the legal and moral obligations can be ineligible under the source's abandonment rule even without a replacement parent. Develop the facts fully before making that adverse finding.

VII.i.4.A.8.b · Failure and refusal are different

Relinquishment involves the role ending; abandonment involves refusal to meet obligations. Do not label every missed contribution or period of absence an intentional refusal without evidence.

VII.i.4.A.8.c · No request and no offer do not alone prove refusal

The example distinguishes a lack of support from a demonstrated refusal to support. Another person may be the last qualifying parent without an abandonment finding against the earlier parent.

VII.i.4.A.8.d · A foster-parent allegation may concern relinquishment only

Develop whether the biological/adoptive parent gave up the role. A foster-parent claim does not automatically require or establish abandonment; use the actual question needed to decide the relationship.

VII.i.4.A.8.e · Credible abandonment allegations still require resolution

An allegation can matter even without a competing foster-parent claim. Develop the relevant obligations, circumstances and conduct rather than ignoring it because no replacement parent filed.

VII.i.4.A.8.f · Survivor parent disputes may affect both parents

In parent DIC, one parent's allegation about another can affect entitlement/rates and contested-claim protections even if the other has not applied. Apply the survivor procedures rather than importing that rate treatment into compensation dependency.

VII.i.4.A.8.g · Develop the full parental history

Obtain the Veteran's age, circumstances, support, obligations and any later resumption, including dates and extent of the relationship. Use telephone or written development as appropriate; isolated assertions rarely answer the full question.

VII.i.4.A.8.h · An adverse abandonment finding needs the required decision

Prepare the two-signature administrative decision using the prescribed abandonment issue, supported facts and reasoning. Provide the applicable notice and review rights; an allegation by itself is not the decision.

VII.i.4.B.1.a · Identify supported family members

The source includes qualifying supported family members under 21 and dependent adults whose incapacity requires support, subject to the actual legal/moral obligation and governing 3.250 definition. Identify whose income and expenses belong in the calculation instead of counting everyone at the address.

VII.i.4.B.1.b · Dependency is benefit-specific

Compensation and the specified death-compensation benefits require both parent relationship and financial dependency. Parent DIC uses its own countable-income rules, and Veteran pension does not include an additional parent benefit.

VII.i.4.B.1.c · Need must exist for the entitlement period

Establish when financial dependency actually arose and existed. In a death claim it can arise before or after the Veteran's death; do not infer need for every period from a later statement.

VII.i.4.B.1.d · Remarriage alone does not end need

A parent's marriage affects the financial household and applicable threshold, but is not automatic financial independence. Reevaluate actual combined income, expenses and applicable assets.

VII.i.4.B.1.e · Use 21P-509 under the actual application rule

The financial statement is generally required for initial parent dependency. If a modern 21-686c specifically required it as an attachment, apply the missing-specified-information rule rather than automatically soliciting the same required item again.

VII.i.4.B.1.f · Clarify additional financial facts appropriately

Attempt permitted telephone clarification and document it on 27-0820, then write if needed. This does not override the modern-form rule for information explicitly required with the application or authorize completing every prescribed form orally.

VII.i.4.B.1.g · A remarried parent must establish continuing dependency

Obtain the financial statement needed to evaluate the changed household. If required verification is not furnished, use the applicable 3.652 proposal process; marriage itself does not establish a cessation date.

VII.i.4.B.1.h · Separate conclusive from factual need

Domestic cases may qualify under the conclusive income amounts or on the facts. Foreign residents always require factual dependency; a foreign parent's low income does not invoke the domestic conclusive presumption.

VII.i.4.B.2.a · Apply the actual monthly conclusive amounts

The source and captured 3.250 provide $400 for one parent not living with the other parent/spouse, or $660 for parents or a remarried parent and spouse living together. Income at or below the applicable amount can establish conclusive dependency; exceeding it requires factual review, not automatic denial.

VII.i.4.B.2.b · Add the supported-family amount when appropriate

Increase the applicable monthly conclusive amount by $185 for each qualifying additional family member. Verify actual support obligations and membership instead of adding every resident automatically.

VII.i.4.B.2.c · Count income actually available for a supported member

Consider income available directly or indirectly to the parent for that person's support. Do not count the person's separate estate or unavailable income as if the parent could use it.

VII.i.4.B.2.d · Net worth is not a separate conclusive-need bar

Where verified income meets the conclusive test, net worth alone does not defeat dependency. Substantial assets may suggest omitted interest or dividends, so verify the complete income picture.

VII.i.4.B.3.a · Factual need concerns reasonable maintenance

For foreign residents and domestic parents above the conclusive amounts, examine whether income and reasonably usable assets provide reasonable maintenance. This includes reasonable comforts consistent with the parent's life, not only bare subsistence. A job or higher gross income alone does not settle the result.

VII.i.4.B.3.b · Use the parent’s actual available estate

Evaluate the parent's property and generally half jointly owned/community property, rather than automatically attributing another person's separate estate. Captured 3.263 excludes the qualifying home/lot, suitable personal effects and statutory exclusions, deducts encumbrances, and considers liquidity, life expectancy, dependents and depletion/medical costs when deciding reasonable use for maintenance.

VII.i.4.B.3.c · Historical death-compensation rates have separate consequences

If only one parent qualifies for the specified death-compensation benefit, use its one-parent rate instructions. This is not a general instruction to alter the living Veteran's compensation using a survivor rate schedule.

VII.i.4.B.4.a · Use the required financial determination record

When factual dependency is established with estate of $80,000 or more, complete 21-5427. The amount is a documentation trigger, not automatic denial. A factual-dependency denial requires the prescribed two-signature administrative decision; use 21-5427 for an excessive-net-worth denial.

VII.i.4.B.5.a · An older statement may need current information

A 21P-509 more than one year old requires the current-evidence review in the next table. Distinguish its age from whether it covers the historical entitlement period; those questions produce different actions.

VII.i.4.B.5.b · Old statements and missing periods have different award sequences

If a known change occurred before the award, request a new 21P-509 with 30 days before adding the parent. If none arrives, process the underlying compensation and deny only the parent issue with the source's 20-0995/21P-509 notice. Do not hold all compensation.

If no change is shown and a current statement fails to cover earlier retroactive months, award the supported period from the first month after the earliest month documented, keep the EP pending and request statements for the missing 12-month periods with 30 days. Without a response, close the unsupported earlier-period development while preserving the already supported award.

If no change is shown but the statement is over a year old, process the award now, request a current statement with 30 days and set code 22 diary control. Review responses promptly and adjust any actual change under the appropriate EP. With continued nonresponse, use the actual 810 date for EP 130, remove the compensation parent component at the verified last-paid date under the source's notice authority, and establish EP 600 proposing the further adjustment from the unsupported first-payable date. Give the 60-day response opportunity and 65-day control.

Review any proposal response and necessary restoration before clearing EP 600; clearing a control does not itself restore an already removed eligible payment. Without adequate evidence after completed protections, apply only the supported action actually proposed and issue the award/overpayment notice. The table's survivor suspension and work-item details remain in their separate scope; the spouse/child verification additional 90 days does not apply here.

VII.i.4.B.6.a · Follow up when improvement is reasonably expected

A factual basis for improving finances can warrant a future financial review. Record the anticipated change and why follow-up is appropriate instead of presuming every dependent parent will cease to need support.

VII.i.4.B.6.b · Set a diary for the expected change

Use code 22 at the appropriate date based on the expected financial circumstances. A diary is a request/review control, not an automatic future termination award.

VII.i.4.B.6.c · Use one to two years when improvement is probable but timing unclear

Where improvement is reasonably expected but the exact date is unknown, the source directs follow-up in one to two years. Select and document a reasonable date from the actual facts.

VII.i.4.B.6.d · A supported minor’s eighteenth birthday triggers review

The source calls for a financial-review letter about 30 days before the oldest supported minor turns 18, with 30 days for response. This is a reevaluation trigger, not proof that family support or dependency automatically ends that day.

VII.i.4.B.7.a · Reevaluate material financial changes

A change in status or significant income/assets can require review of current need. Obtain the actual facts and compare them with the applicable conclusive or factual test before changing payments.

VII.i.4.B.7.b · Loss of need requires the applicable notice authority

Generally complete the proposed-action process when financial dependency actually ceases. A direct Veteran report that the parent is no longer dependent has the specified exception, subject to 3.103/3.217 conditions and notice. Remarriage or an unconfirmed third-party report alone is not that direct report.

VII.i.4.B.7.c · Financial loss uses the following-year cutoff

For actual cessation of parent financial dependency, the source's first nonpayable date is January 1 of the following year. Captured 3.660(a)(2) expresses the same boundary as payable through the cessation year's last day. Do not substitute the spouse/child next-month event rule.

VII.i.4.B.7.d · Death-compensation changes can affect another parent

The historical death-compensation benefit may require a separate proposed rate adjustment for the other parent, with the prescribed 60-day response and 65-day control. Do not apply that survivor rate sequence to a living Veteran's dependent-parent component.

VII.i.4.B.8.a · Parent death and financial independence have different dates

For modern compensation parent death, the event month is payable and removal starts the following month; pre-October 1, 1982 cases use the historical rule. Death-compensation parent awards use their separate first-of-death-month treatment and surviving-parent rate provisions.

VII.i.4.B.8.b · A remaining death-compensation parent may get an automatic increase

The source's death-compensation remaining-parent increase does not require a new claim when its conditions are met. This is distinct from adding or removing a parent on a living Veteran's award.

VII.i.4.B.8.c · Correct a missed death-compensation increase

The specified administrative failure to make the remaining parent's required increase can be corrected without the ordinary time limit described in the source. Verify the original eligibility and award facts before invoking that correction rule.

VII.i.4.B.9.a · Renewed dependency depends on proof timing and prior reason

When dependency actually resumes and satisfactory evidence is received within one year of reduction/discontinuance notice, use the supported resumption date subject to payment rules. Otherwise the source generally uses claim receipt. Do not apply this automatically to a final net-worth termination governed by 3.660(d) or a verification-only reduction governed by its own facts-found rule.

VII.i.4.B.9.b · Entitlement and payment commencement are different

The example distinguishes the day renewed dependency arises from the next-month payment commencement under 3.31. If need resumes before the scheduled year-end discontinuance, review whether any actual payment interruption should occur at all.

VII.i.4.B.9.c · Restoring a second death-compensation parent may affect the first

Apply the specific historical death-compensation reinstatement and other-parent rate procedure, including the existing payee's notice protection. This does not supply a general formula for dependent-parent compensation.

VII.i.4.B.9.d · Protect the existing death-compensation payee during the rate change

The source uses the prescribed proposal period and adjustment boundaries when a second parent's return affects the first parent's rate, including its protection against creating the described overpayment on the other award. Keep those two-payee survivor rules separate from the living Veteran's parent benefit.

VII.i.3.B.1.a · Request extra parentage proof only when required

An adequate prescribed-form statement ordinarily establishes biological parentage. Additional proof is required when the actual 3.204(a)(2) conditions apply, such as a material conflict, questionable validity or the specified foreign residence. Do not routinely request every child's birth certificate.

VII.i.3.B.1.b · Use adequate age evidence for the biological mother's child

When documentary evidence is needed, proof adequate to establish the child's age also establishes the biological relationship to the female Veteran under this rule. Resolve actual discrepancies rather than adding a separate routine parentage demand.

VII.i.3.B.1.c · Use the married biological father's evidence rule

When the male Veteran is married to the child's biological mother, adequate age evidence can establish the relationship under this block. Review the actual marriage and birth facts rather than treating the unmarried-father rule as universal.

VII.i.3.B.1.d · Use acknowledgment or permitted substitutes for an unmarried father

When additional proof is required, use the Veteran's acknowledgment, including an adequate oral statement or personally signed form. If acknowledgment is unavailable, consider the specified birth/baptism record naming the father, judicial support decree or other evidence identifying him and his acceptance of the child. Develop what is missing rather than requiring all alternatives.

VII.i.3.B.1.e · DNA may be considered but cannot be demanded

Voluntarily submitted DNA evidence may help establish biological parentage. VA cannot require the claimant to obtain a DNA test as the condition for recognition under this block.

VII.i.3.B.2.a · Adoption needs its legal evidence

Obtain the adoption decree or legally authorized adoptive placement agreement, subject to the revised-birth-certificate and inaccessible-record alternatives below. The particular decree, placement and actual custody determine which adoption rule applies.

VII.i.3.B.2.b · An interlocutory decree is conditional

An interlocutory adoption becomes final only after specified time or events. Identify those conditions and custody rather than describing it as a final decree or rejecting all interlocutory adoptions automatically.

VII.i.3.B.2.c · Placement must be authorized under law

An adoptive placement agreement is made with an agency legally authorized to arrange adoptions and places the child with prospective adoptive parents. A private informal custody arrangement is not automatically that agreement.

VII.i.3.B.2.d · Use the earliest qualifying adoption event and actual custody

If VA receives notice within one year, entitlement may begin with the earliest qualifying decree, interlocutory adoption or authorized placement under 3.403(a)(5). Benefits require actual custody; payment commencement remains subject to 3.31. Identify both the legal event and custody date rather than automatically using the final decree.

VII.i.3.B.2.e · Termination of another parent's rights is not adoption by itself

A decree ending parental rights and awarding prospective custody does not alone establish adoption. Review its actual legal effect and refer a genuine validity question to District Counsel.

VII.i.3.B.2.f · Ended placement uses a day-after cutoff

For entitlement based on an interlocutory decree, placement agreement or other qualifying legal action, identify when the child left custody or the legal action was rescinded or terminated. The applicable event is the last payable day; first nonpayable is the following day. Do not substitute a generic next-month removal rule.

VII.i.3.B.2.g · A revised birth certificate can prove adoption but has date limits

A revised certificate naming the Veteran can establish the relationship. If it is the only adoption proof, the source generally limits entitlement to its receipt, subject to 3.31 and its timely qualifying-rating exception when the certificate was issued before that rating's effective date. Explain how 20-0995 with earlier qualifying evidence can support review of an earlier date; do not presume the certificate proves every earlier adoption event.

VII.i.3.B.2.h · Do not force a court petition for sealed records

When the custodian cannot routinely release the decree, do not demand that the claimant petition a court solely to obtain it. Use the permitted alternate evidence, including statements of two disinterested witnesses and field investigation when necessary, to establish the relevant adoption facts.

VII.i.3.B.2.i · Distinguish proof failure, legal doubt and a merits rejection

The table requires no administrative decision for a legitimate, unconflicted adoption or a denial solely for failure to furnish required documents. A genuine legal-validity question goes to Counsel; favorable legal advice plus supported recognition needs no extra administrative decision. A negative determination on the merits requires the prescribed two-signature administrative decision. The table's shared cells apply to both stated no-decision situations.

VII.i.3.B.3.a · A survivor's later adoption has extra conditions

For adoption by a surviving spouse after the Veteran's death, the source requires adoption within two years, the child's qualifying membership in the Veteran's household at death and the required support conditions during the interval. Resolve the actual household, support and adoption evidence. This is a survivor entitlement rule, not a way to establish any later child on a living Veteran's award.

VII.i.3.B.4.a · Foreign adoption adds requirements to the ordinary rules

An adoption under foreign law requires both the applicable general adoption evidence and the special rules in this topic. First identify the actual legal jurisdiction and whether the child continues to reside abroad.

VII.i.3.B.4.b · Foreign jurisdiction has a defined meaning

The source excludes the United States' States, territories and possessions, District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and Northern Mariana Islands from its foreign-jurisdiction definition. Do not decide solely from an unfamiliar place name.

VII.i.3.B.4.c · Continued foreign residence requires continuing conditions

For a child adopted under foreign law who continues living abroad, establish adoption before 18, at least half support from the Veteran, the required custody restriction concerning biological parents and the Veteran/qualifying former-parent household. The source permits specified school or institutional residence exceptions. A decree alone does not establish all these conditions.

VII.i.3.B.4.d · The foreign-adoption survivor rule uses pre-death qualifications

For the specified surviving-spouse case, establish either qualifying payment to the Veteran in the year before death or satisfaction of the required conditions throughout that year, together with the applicable adoption rules. Do not replace that historical inquiry with the survivor's current support alone.

VII.i.3.B.4.e · Foreign adoption requires both decree and birth record

Obtain the specified adoption decree and birth certificate; a revised birth certificate alone does not satisfy this foreign-adoption rule. Request missing evidence with 30 days and use field investigation where facts remain doubtful. An ordinary placement agreement does not waive these special documentary requirements.

VII.i.3.B.4.f · Verify foreign-adoption conditions through the actual follow-up sequence

Set the first verification about one year after award authorization, using the designated diary or specified code 30 fallback. Request certification under EP 130 with 60 days. Two consecutive satisfactory annual verifications end routine annual follow-up; after the first satisfactory response, set the next review one year from the current date.

If no certification arrives, use EP 600 and the prescribed 60-day proposal opportunity/65-day control. In the first-year case the unsupported date is the original addition; in the second-year case it is the first month after the last satisfactory certification. Review responses and reinstate or adjust supported benefits before closing controls. This procedure does not use ordinary 21-0538 waiver/restoration rules.

A response showing a condition actually ceased needs the required administrative determination and day-after actual cessation adjustment. If the cessation date is missing, attempt contact and then a 30-day request before the prescribed adverse-action process. Nonresponse does not authorize immediate final removal without the applicable proposal protection. Explain the final review option using 20-0995 as directed.

VII.i.3.B.5.a · Adoption by another person can end the Veteran's child compensation

Effective September 14, 2015, 3.58(b) bars extra disability compensation after the specified legal severance of the Veteran's parental relationship, including qualifying severance without a new completed adoption. Adoption by a family member does not itself avoid the rule. A compliant direct report of a pre-effective-date event uses the September 14, 2015 floor; a later event ordinarily uses the first following month. Third-party/folder discoveries require the separately referenced V.ii.4.A.6.n analysis. Do not routinely ask without a reason.

VII.i.3.B.5.b · Pension has a different adoption-out rule

Giving up a child for adoption does not by itself require removing that child from Veteran pension. Examine the pension custody/support conditions and use Counsel when the legal facts require it; compensation's 2015 severance rule is not interchangeable with this benefit.

VII.i.3.B.5.c · The child's own Veteran-based benefits can remain

Adoption by another person does not itself end the child's eligibility for benefits in the child's own right, such as qualifying survivor or education benefits. Distinguish those awards from additional compensation paid to the biological Veteran.

VII.i.3.B.5.d · Record the actual relationship and award outcome

When denying or reducing the Veteran's extra compensation under the adoption-out rule, use the prescribed relationship/status entries, including the applicable NOT MET condition, and explain the actual basis and date in the notice. A database change alone is not the adjudicative explanation or notice authority.

VII.i.3.B.6.a · Stepchild depends on the spouse-child relationship

A stepchild is the biological or adopted child of the Veteran's spouse, with the source's separate deemed-valid surviving-spouse qualification. Verify the marriage, child relationship and timing under 3.57; supporting an unrelated child is not enough.

VII.i.3.B.6.b · Do not automatically call a same-sex spouse's newborn a stepchild

A child born to the Veteran's same-sex spouse during marriage may have a different legally recognized parent relationship. Apply the relevant parentage/adoption law and obtain Counsel review where needed instead of automatically assigning stepchild status.

VII.i.3.B.6.c · Household membership can continue despite living elsewhere

Review actual household membership or qualifying constructive custody, including at least half support. Authorized absences for school, medical care, military service or incarceration can preserve household status. Another person's legal custody does not by itself defeat actual qualifying household membership. Verify the age and timing requirements, including applicable school-child exceptions.

VII.i.3.B.6.d · Establish the marriage, parentage and household facts together

Use the overview as a sequence: establish the Veteran's marriage to the child's parent, establish that parent's relationship to the child, and resolve household membership and other eligibility. An incomplete spouse award does not necessarily block the independently supported stepchild.

VII.i.3.B.6.e · Ask for the facts needed for this relationship

Use the prescribed application and required child/custodian information. A spouse need not already be added to the Veteran's award, and a missing spouse SSN does not alone bar an otherwise established stepchild. Develop required relationship and household evidence according to the actual form's requirements.

VII.i.3.B.6.f · Survivor separation requires its own entitlement review

A separated spouse and stepchild may qualify for survivor benefits under the specific fault, relationship and household conditions described in the source. Apply those death-related requirements; a living compensation household review is not the complete survivor analysis.

VII.i.3.B.6.g · A marriage ending before award is not automatic stepchild rejection

The Veteran's marriage to the child's parent may end before VA grants the award without necessarily destroying established stepchild eligibility. Review whether the required relationship and household status continue rather than using the award-processing date alone.

VII.i.3.B.6.h · Separation or divorce does not automatically end recognized status

Once VA recognizes the stepchild, later death, separation or termination of marriage does not by itself settle continued child status. Determine actual household membership, support and applicable circumstances.

VII.i.3.B.6.i · Develop household and support facts after the parent's death or separation

Contact the Veteran for the event date, where the stepchild lives, custodian/address and support. If the required information cannot be obtained, use the table's written follow-up and protected proposal sequence. The table distinguishes an initial last-paid-date action from the supported event-based action when later information arrives; verify which row and actual date apply before processing. Do not silently treat an unknown event date as a known household-ending date.

VII.i.3.B.6.j · Use the response's actual household and support information

Continue supported benefits when the stepchild remains in the household, qualifies under an authorized absence, or receives at least half support. Obtain missing support/custodian facts through the specified contact and next-business-day follow-up before the applicable award action. Less-than-half support requires review of any approved exceptional circumstances; it is not automatically the same as a qualifying absence.

Where the source directs action using the last actual evidence of household membership, first nonpayable is the following day. Explain the one-year opportunity to submit 20-0995 with the needed facts for the particular missing-support-information outcome. Do not convert that specific rule into the ordinary 21-0538 no-form restoration process.

VII.i.3.B.6.k · Proposal nonresponse has distinct supported dates

After the full 65-day control and required notice protections, use the day after the known death/separation event for that table row. When the date is unknown, or the Veteran's marriage terminated, the shared table cell directs the day after the last actual evidence of household membership. In the divorce row that is not automatically the divorce date. Review the factual basis and actual proposal before final action.

VII.i.3.C.1.a · The unmarried requirement also applies to minors

A person generally must be unmarried to qualify as a child for VA purposes, including before age 18. The specific historical 3.950 exception and restoration rules must be considered where relevant.

VII.i.3.C.1.b · Use an actual marriage report or evidence

A beneficiary statement identifying the marriage month/year or evidence of marriage warrants review under this section. Verify the source and notice requirements; do not demand an unnecessary certificate for every direct report.

VII.i.3.C.1.c · Living with someone is not automatically marriage

Cohabitation alone does not establish marriage. If the actual relationship could satisfy common-law marriage under the controlling jurisdiction, develop and decide those legal elements rather than inferring marriage merely from a shared address.

VII.i.3.C.1.d · The marriage cutoff depends on who is being paid

For the child's own benefit or an apportionment, use the first day of the marriage month as the first nonpayable date. For additional benefits paid for a dependent child, the modern rule uses the first following month; the table's pre-October 1, 1982 historical event rule uses the following year. Verify earlier age/school cutoffs and required notice before adjusting.

VII.i.3.C.1.e · A survivor award may require changes for several payees

When marriage removes a child from a surviving spouse's or children's award, recompute the affected survivor rate or apportionment under the applicable table. Preserve the notice and payment rules for other payees; this is not a single universal compensation adjustment.

VII.i.3.C.2.a · An ended marriage does not always restore child status

A void or qualifying annulled marriage can permit restoration subject to fraud/collusion limits. Under captured 3.55(b)(2), the separate death/divorce exception concerns a child marriage terminated before November 1, 1990, with the rule effective on/after January 1, 1975. The survivor-spouse exception for proceedings begun before November 1990 is not a child's exception. Other child eligibility must still exist.

VII.i.3.C.2.b · Document the marriage ending and all other child conditions

Obtain the actual termination facts and required evidence. Confirm the child also meets age, school or continuing-incapacity requirements and any affected Veteran/relationship conditions. A termination report alone does not establish renewed entitlement.

VII.i.3.C.2.c · A claimed void marriage requires a legal determination

Develop the facts and submit the legal question to District Counsel. Counsel's supported opinion constitutes the decision for this purpose; no additional administrative decision is required merely to duplicate it. Do not treat a claimant's use of the word void as the legal finding.

VII.i.3.C.2.d · Use the final annulment decree and investigate actual fraud concerns

Request the final decree with 30 days when missing; apply the specified missing-proof disposition if it is not furnished. Where fraud or collusion is reasonably at issue, obtain the petition, answer, transcript or other needed record and Counsel's opinion. A supported fraud/collusion determination requires the prescribed three-signature administrative decision; a missing decree alone does not prove fraud.

VII.i.3.C.2.e · Restoration dates differ for void and annulled marriages

For a void marriage, use the later of claim receipt and the date cohabitation ceased. For annulment, a claim received within the applicable year can use the final decree date; otherwise use claim receipt, subject to remaining eligibility and payment rules. Verify the actual filing deadline, extensions and dates rather than equating every dissolution with a new entitlement date.

VII.i.3.D.1.a · Identify the actual parental line

For this rule, same parental line means Veteran-parents of the same sex who are not, and have never been, married to each other. It includes biological parents, adoptive parents and stepparents. A Veteran father and mother are not in the same parental line; neither are two married female Veterans. Determine the actual relationships before applying concurrent-benefit restrictions.

VII.i.3.D.1.b · Living-parent and same-line survivor situations differ

Separate otherwise eligible disability/survivor benefits may be concurrent when the parents are not in the same parental line or at least one same-line parent is living. Both same-line parents deceased can require an election. The source has historical January 1, 1957 and June 9, 1960 restrictions and exceptions; verify the actual benefit and death dates rather than assuming every two-parent case is barred. Permitted survivor benefit re-elections are distinct from final education elections.

VII.i.3.D.1.c · Education election can affect benefits under either parent

DEA or Fry payment can bar adult capable-child dependency benefits based on either Veteran parent's service. Under-18 and established-incapacity periods have their specified exceptions, but the first paid education election can become final for later adult capable-child periods. A second parent's award is not automatically an escape from that election.

VII.i.3.D.2.a · The election needs an authorized signature

Use a signed election from the child when legally authorized or the appropriate parent, guardian or fiduciary. Identify who can act for the actual child; an unsigned preference is not a completed election.

VII.i.3.D.2.b · Explain the available benefits and right to elect

Tell the claimant the payable alternatives and re-election rights. The source permits action on a clearly more advantageous benefit without waiting unnecessarily, while preserving the claimant's informed election rights and required notices.

VII.i.3.D.2.c · A timely greater-benefit election can preserve an earlier date

If the greater-benefit election arrives within one year of notice of entitlement, apply the supported entitlement date and payment commencement rule. A later election generally uses election receipt, subject to the source's actual qualifications. Review filing timing rather than automatically paying the greater rate from every historical entitlement date.

VII.i.3.D.2.d · A lesser-benefit election uses the existing payment boundary

For election of a lower benefit, the source uses the actual last-paid-date boundary. Verify the current award and payment history; do not create an arbitrary retroactive lower-rate election.

VII.i.3.D.2.e · Coordinate the old and new awards

Resolve effects on other payees first, stop the existing benefit at the verified last-paid date, and pay only the permitted difference for any earlier overlapping greater-benefit period. Pay the full new benefit after the old award ends. Annotate linked claims/payees and notify everyone whose award changes.

VII.i.3.D.2.f · The example illustrates difference-only payment before cutoff

The example switches Jim from a lower to a greater benefit under the other parent. Before the old award's last-paid-date boundary, the new award pays the difference, then the full new rate. Its dollar amounts and dates illustrate coordination, not current benefit rates or a general formula independent of the two awards.

VII.i.3.D.3.a · A child's election can change another survivor's rate

Review every surviving spouse or child whose rate depends on the electing child. The election is not complete merely because the elected child's new award was prepared.

VII.i.3.D.3.b · Check the surviving spouse's specific benefit

Removing a child can change the spouse's DIC or pension entitlement differently, including pension income consequences. Use the actual survivor rate and apportionment facts rather than subtracting a standard compensation child increment.

VII.i.3.D.3.c · Other children may have different rate consequences

The remaining children's shares can change, while the specified over-18 DIC case with a surviving spouse may be unaffected. Identify which statutory award each child receives before recomputing rates.

VII.i.3.D.4.a · A reduced spouse award and child's new award need coordinated dates

Use the spouse's supported last-paid-date reduction and the permitted difference on the child's earlier new-benefit period. The relevant offset is the spouse's additional amount for that child, not the spouse's entire benefit. Apply the prescribed notices and avoid paying both full amounts for the same period.

VII.i.3.D.4.b · Ending a larger apportionment can increase the spouse's payment

When the ended apportionment exceeds the spouse's child increment, follow the table to stop it at the verified last-paid date and adjust the spouse. The child's greater/lesser elected benefit follows its own difference-payment or last-paid-date rule. Notify each affected payee.

VII.i.3.D.4.c · Remaining children's increases follow the coordinated boundary

Increase affected other-child awards at the specified last-paid-date boundary and limit the electing child's earlier payment to the supported difference. Record the cross-award effects and provide all required notices.

VII.i.3.D.4.d · The example separates a spouse's child increment from total DIC

The Jane example subtracts the old spouse child increment from the child's new DIC for the earlier overlapping period, then pays the full child amount after the spouse adjustment. The illustration demonstrates the offset and dates; do not treat its historical dollars as today's rates.

VII.ii.1.A.1.a · School eligibility requires the actual age and attendance conditions

An otherwise qualifying unmarried child from age 18 until the applicable cutoff before 23 may qualify through approved education. Full-time and part-time attendance can qualify. Establish the child relationship, approved course and actual dates rather than assuming enrollment alone satisfies every benefit condition.

VII.ii.1.A.1.b · Use the prescribed school application with its permitted exceptions

21-674 is the prescribed school-attendance request. Apply the actual standardized-form/completeness rules and the authorized telephone completion exception when applicable. A document mentioning school does not automatically replace the required application or authorized signature.

VII.ii.1.A.1.c · The school must meet the approval requirements

Accept credible information that the institution is accredited by the proper authority. Qualifying home schooling uses the State's compulsory-attendance approval requirements, including its permitted grade-level scope. Do not assume every private course, unaccredited program or claimed home school qualifies.

VII.ii.1.A.1.d · Verify accreditation when the facts actually require it

For domestic institutions, use the proper State or recognized accreditation authority; foreign schools and nonstandard programs may require the source's designated foreign education or State Department inquiry. Document the authority and result. Broadly useful official findings should follow the source's communication process; one unsupported claimant statement is not a universal school listing.

VII.ii.1.A.1.e · Older forms can require missing accreditation information

Where an accepted prior form version omitted the relevant accreditation question, establish that fact through the appropriate inquiry. Do not automatically reject every old form or require repeated proof when adequate credible approval evidence is already present.

VII.ii.1.A.2.a · Whole Federal support is a particular bar

For a child age 18 or older, school attendance funded wholly by the Federal government with the specified maintenance, clothing, housing and necessities can bar the dependent school benefit under 3.667(f)(2). An ordinary grant, partial assistance or generic Federal aid label is not automatically whole support. The under-18 exception remains relevant.

VII.ii.1.A.2.b · Accept credible funding facts and clarify actual doubt

An adequate claimant statement can establish whether the program is wholly federally supported. Seek additional information when evidence or the program raises a real question; identify the actual support rather than guessing from a school's name.

VII.ii.1.A.2.c · A normal break can remain payable before Federal support begins

A child leaving an otherwise qualifying non-Federal term for a later wholly federally supported program may retain the qualifying normal break up to the actual Federal-program beginning. Apply that specific boundary instead of ending at the preceding school's last day or automatically carrying payment through the next month.

VII.ii.1.A.2.d · Service-academy attendance needs the Federal-support review

The source identifies the five service academies as programs relevant to this inquiry. Check the actual institution, program and attendance dates with the whole-Federal-support rule; do not assume an unrelated school with military in its name is a listed academy.

VII.ii.1.A.2.e · Preparatory programs have their own identified treatment

The source also lists service-academy preparatory schools. Verify the actual program and support conditions, including other specifically described Federal programs where applicable. Admission to a preparatory course is not automatically the same date as admission to the later academy.

VII.ii.1.A.3.a · Attendance at the eighteenth birthday can support continuation

A claim received within the applicable year can preserve entitlement from age 18 if school attendance was qualifying then. The birthday entitlement date and the next-month higher compensation payment date are separate; verify the actual claim and term.

VII.ii.1.A.3.b · Normal breaks need both surrounding attendance periods

Holidays, vacations and normal breaks do not necessarily interrupt attendance when the child attended before and resumed the appropriate next term. Establish actual resumption before treating a merely planned return as completed continuity.

VII.ii.1.A.3.c · Do not duplicate adequate evidence for a birthday during a break

When a complete consistent 21-674 affirms the required continuity around age 18, do not routinely demand a prior-term 21-674b. Develop an actual inconsistency or missing fact rather than creating a universal extra-form requirement.

VII.ii.1.A.3.d · Summer sessions can preserve ordinary continuity

Summer or trimester scheduling can qualify under the source's normal-break and resumed-term rules. Its example allows restoration for a supported summer interval followed by the regular term. Review actual terms, return and filing timing; absence from a particular summer class is not automatically a permanent school cessation.

VII.ii.1.A.4.a · Age notifications differ by benefit

The system sends the specified DIC notices around ages 13, 16 and 18, while compensation/pension use the applicable age-18 notice. Identify the actual benefit and child's birthday before deciding which letter should have been sent.

VII.ii.1.A.4.b · The age-thirteen notice introduces survivor education information

For the specified DIC child, the notice provides the relevant education and future entitlement information to the appropriate payee/parent. This is not a compensation school award or proof the child has already elected education benefits.

VII.ii.1.A.4.c · The age-sixteen notice gives the next survivor information

The specified DIC notice addresses the upcoming survivor/education choices and required information at that stage. Do not turn its existence into an automatic education election or change in current child payment.

VII.ii.1.A.4.d · Send the correct age-eighteen continuation information

The notice about 60 days before 18 explains available school or incapacity continuation and includes the applicable forms. The claimant still needs to establish the particular entitlement; a generated notice does not itself extend the award indefinitely.

VII.ii.1.A.4.e · A failed-letter work item needs actual follow-up

An 882G work item signals failure of a system-generated notice. Its label does not mean every case is an age-18 notice: check the child's actual age and benefit before choosing the letter.

VII.ii.1.A.4.f · Send the age-appropriate local notice and resolve the work item

Prepare the required locally generated letter with the applicable school, education, incapacity or survivor enclosures. Where the corporate fiduciary case belongs with the hub, follow the source's referral/responsibility process. Retain the actual sent/referral record before clearing the work item.

VII.ii.1.A.4.g · REPS language belongs to the qualified survivor situation

The provided paragraph explains the separate Restored Entitlement Program for Survivors and its historical death/service requirements, including the relevant pre-August 13, 1981 condition. Include it when that survivor notice calls for it. It is not a general additional benefit for every living Veteran's school child.

VII.ii.1.B.1.a · Birthday entitlement and the higher payment rate are separate

When qualifying attendance exists at 18 and the claim meets the one-year rule, entitlement can begin on the birthday. Additional compensation at the school-child rate generally begins the following month under 3.31, with the supported minor-child rate retained for the birthday month. A verified normal break can matter.

VII.ii.1.B.1.b · A later first term uses its actual beginning

If the child was not in qualifying attendance or a covered break at 18, a timely claim can support entitlement from the later term's beginning, with the applicable following-month payment rule. Do not use the birthday solely because the form arrived within a year of it.

VII.ii.1.B.1.c · A late birthday claim can still cover a timely later term

For a claim outside the year after 18, identify actual term-start dates within the applicable filing period and before 23. A continuous overall school span can conceal a later qualifying term. The example permits payment from the month following a later January term even though the earlier fall term was outside the year. Develop relevant terms rather than denying every earlier period from a single earliest-start date.

VII.ii.1.B.1.d · A qualifying rating notice may support an earlier school award

A school claim within one year of notice of a qualifying rating can use the supported school period and rating effective date, even when compensation was already at least 30 percent. Use the later applicable entitlement condition and 3.31, and reconcile existing dependency denials or pending claims. A rating notice does not create child eligibility before age 18 or before actual qualifying attendance.

VII.ii.1.B.1.e · A school child's DIC is an independent award

A qualifying child age 18–23 can receive DIC in the child's own right. Apply the specific DIC filing and payment dates, including the described birthday and later-attendance situations; do not apply the Veteran's additional-compensation rate transition mechanically to independent DIC.

VII.ii.1.B.1.f · Use the earliest applicable school cutoff

Ordinarily school benefits stop at the earlier of the first month after attendance ends or the 23rd birthday. If the child turns 18 and ends school in the same month, the source directs termination at the 18th birthday without that month's school allowance. Marriage, death or a different bar may create an earlier cutoff.

VII.ii.1.B.2.a · DEA usually bars adult capable-child dependency payments

The same adult capable school child generally cannot receive Chapter 35 DEA while dependency/survivor benefits based on that child are paid for the prohibited period. Under-18 and established-incapacity periods have exceptions; a spouse's DEA is not automatically a bar to the Veteran's spouse allowance.

VII.ii.1.B.2.b · Chapter 33 contains different legal programs

The history distinguishes military-approved transferred entitlement from the Fry Scholarship. Identify the actual statutory program before applying a concurrent-payment rule; a generic Chapter 33 label is insufficient.

VII.ii.1.B.2.c · Transferred Chapter 33 and Fry have different consequences

Transferred entitlement under 38 U.S.C. 3319 may coexist with otherwise eligible dependency benefits, while Fry under 3311 generally has the adult capable-child bar. The table's limited pre-August 1, 2011 Fry/DIC exception concerns that specific survivor benefit and program timing, not living Veteran compensation generally.

VII.ii.1.B.2.d · Preserve the actually excepted or earlier period

Do not adjust solely for an education payment covering a protected under-18 or established-incapacity period. A qualifying normal break before the actual education entitlement begins may remain payable. Compare the real dates and status rather than using the education deposit date.

VII.ii.1.B.2.e · Other education or Social Security benefits are not this election bar

Education/vocational rehabilitation based on the child's own service and the specified Social Security benefits can coexist with otherwise eligible dependent benefits. Apply their actual conditions; do not expand the DEA/Fry prohibition to every educational payment.

VII.ii.1.B.2.f · Get program and effective-payment facts from the right source

Use the child-specific education inquiry and payment history. Share's CH33 entry cannot distinguish Fry from transfer. Obtain the actual program and first effective allowance date from the RPO of jurisdiction through the specified authorized contact methods. Keep only relevant child information in the record, not unrelated people's payment data.

VII.ii.1.B.3.a · A DEA notice needs an actual compensation-overlap review

Review the CH35 820 work item and actual periods. Cancel it if no prohibited compensation overlap requires adjustment; otherwise use the appropriate EP 130 and Potential Under/Overpayment, including both Veteran and child controls when an apportionment requires them. Clear or cancel the work item according to the action actually taken.

VII.ii.1.B.3.b · Pension and survivor education conflicts follow their routing

The responsible pension/survivor processing center handles those awards under the applicable source directions. Establish the actual benefit and payee instead of applying the living compensation workflow indiscriminately.

VII.ii.1.B.3.c · A Fry notice also needs the actual overlap decision

Review the RPO notice and annotate it when no adjustment is required. For a supported child own-award overlap, establish the child control; an apportioned compensation case can need controls under both accounts. A notice by itself does not prove a prohibited paid period.

VII.ii.1.B.3.d · Notice authority depends on payee and report source

The child's own/apportioned education overlap uses contemporaneous notice under this block. A primary beneficiary's qualifying direct report can permit contemporaneous action, while RPO/third-party information affecting the Veteran's extra child compensation requires the prescribed proposal, including EP 600 CH35 Dependent Removal Due Process. Obtain a missing education beginning date and resolve responses/hearing protections before final action.

VII.ii.1.B.3.e · The education allowance beginning is the cutoff boundary

The day before the education allowance begins is the last payable dependency day under 3.503(a)(8); the allowance beginning date is first nonpayable for the prohibited adult capable-child period. Do not move it to the following month or use the later bank-deposit date. Preserve a separately excepted under-18 period.

VII.ii.1.B.3.f · The debt follows who received the overlapping payment

For benefits paid directly to the child, coordinate the overlap with the RPO/finance procedure concerning the initial education payment. Extra compensation paid to the Veteran creates the Veteran's overpayment, not automatically a debt against the child's education account. Reconcile both awards where necessary.

VII.ii.1.B.4.a · A different school name alone requires no adjustment

A transfer matters when continuity, accreditation or whole Federal support changes. Otherwise no award change is required merely for the new school, and separate 21-674 forms for every institution are unnecessary when one adequate form establishes the relevant facts.

VII.ii.1.B.4.b · Third-party school changes use development before proposal

Seek the beneficiary's information with 30 days under the appropriate EP 130. Review an adequate response promptly; otherwise follow the supported EP 600 proposal with its 60-day response opportunity/65-day control and required notices. Do not restart the same 30-day request when the table directs moving to the proposal.

After final nonresponse removal, a later 21-674/21-674b alone uses its own receipt as the claim date for B.1. A timely 20-0995 with required school information can preserve continuous pursuit and use the initial claim receipt for that analysis. Neither route guarantees payment for an ineligible school period.

VII.ii.1.B.4.c · Early school termination and vacation nonreturn differ

Ordinary early termination generally uses the first following month. For an award that paid a vacation expecting a return that did not occur, use the earlier of the actual last-paid date and first day of the scheduled return month. A third-party report requires B.4.b protection. Check any qualifying normal-break continuation and the distinct whole-Federal-support rule before applying a generic end date.

VII.ii.1.B.4.d · Marriage or death follows the dependency event rule

Use the separately referenced child marriage/death procedure and actual payee type, including any earlier cutoff. Do not leave school payments in place until graduation when another established event ended eligibility.

VII.ii.1.B.4.e · A favorable incapacity rating does not immediately end school status

Change from school child to permanent-incapacity status at the earlier of the 23rd birthday and first month after school ends under this block. Reconcile the rating entitlement and actual award; do not remove the eligible child entirely or immediately reduce a supported school allowance merely because incapacity was granted.

VII.ii.1.B.4.f · Adult school/incapacity DIC belongs on a separate child award

A qualifying over-18 child receives the described DIC through a separate award even when a surviving spouse also receives DIC. When the child is already receiving benefits, the source's continuation situation need not always require a new claim. Apply the actual payee and fiduciary requirements.

VII.ii.1.B.5.a · Future attendance requires a properly timed claim and later confirmation

Do not act on a school claim while the child remains more than three calendar months before 18. Cancel the applicable EP 130, use EP 400 for the request for a new 21-674 within the window, and clear it. If processing delay brings an early form into the permitted window, use the required telephone attempt to confirm current entries; an unsuccessful attempt requires the new-form request. Three calendar months is not a fixed 90 days.

For a supported future attendance award, send 21-674b with the decision notice. Give 60 days from actual planned commencement, or the 18th birthday when it occurs during a term, and set code 21 to expire in the following month. An intention to attend still needs the later confirmation.

VII.ii.1.B.5.b · Future-attendance nonresponse differs from annual verification

A complete unchanged confirmation permits the appropriate diary cancellation and EP 692 action; a change requires the actual EP 130/award review. If confirmation is absent after the request period, the table first removes/suspends the affected school component at the actual last-paid date and then establishes the protected proposal. Do not suspend all unrelated Veteran compensation.

The proposal table lists last-paid-date, scheduled-start-month and eighteenth-birthday alternatives whose conditions must be reconciled with the actual award. Verify the specific supported proposed date rather than blindly taking an earliest date that predates entitlement. Use the 60-day response opportunity and 65-day control; a sufficient response requires review of restoration/amendment before clearing the control.

Final nonresponse follows the actual authorized proposal and notices for every affected payee. Related decreases/increases and income changes follow the table's specific payment instructions. A later bare school form uses its new receipt; a timely 20-0995 with the required school evidence permits the specified continuous-pursuit review, not the 21-0538 restoration shortcut.

VII.ii.1.B.6.a · Verify school attendance at least annually

The beneficiary must certify continuing attendance and expected continuation at least once each year, normally using 21-8960-1 or the permitted documented contact. The annual process checks actual continuing eligibility rather than merely renewing an earlier forecast.

VII.ii.1.B.6.b · Use the actual annual mailing and diary schedule

21-8960-1 generally issues in March and/or two months before the expected school end, with the source's June-end exception. Set the applicable code 22 control with the 60-day response opportunity. Review the actual letter and due period rather than inferring mailing from a calendar date.

VII.ii.1.B.6.c · Failed annual mailing requires a new actual request

For an 882H failure, send the form and letter. Use code 30 to expire in the month after 60 days from the later of the work-item date and actual mailing; include the required comment and clear the work item after action. An unsent system letter does not start the claimant's period.

VII.ii.1.B.6.d · A returned annual form can resolve or reveal development

For unchanged supported attendance, cancel the diary and use the specified EP 692 action. A material gap or unverified accreditation needs the 30-day request for 21-674 under EP 130/Potential Under/Overpayment; continued nonresponse goes to B.4.b's proposal step. A changed end date needs its supported award and notice. Perform the education-payment inquiry each time.

VII.ii.1.B.6.e · Annual nonresponse proposes from the last actual school confirmation

After the initial 60-day opportunity, identify the latest actual communication establishing attendance and propose the first following month under the table. Establish the applicable EP 600 with the 60-day response opportunity/65-day control and complete notice/hearing requirements. Review a response before final action. This annual branch does not inherit B.5.b's preliminary last-paid-date suspension merely because both use a school form.

VII.ii.1.B.6.f · Every school form requires the education-payment check

For 21-674, 21-674b and 21-8960-1, establish or verify the child's BIRLS identification and perform the education inquiry. Review only the relevant child's payment information. A generic CH33 entry needs the RPO program/effective-date clarification before choosing whether adjustment is required.

VII.ii.1.B.7.a · Minority-only fiduciary payment can end at actual majority

If the child is paid through a fiduciary solely because of minority, the legal age of majority permits the direct-payment review. Verify the applicable State age rather than assuming it is always 18. This does not automatically transfer the Veteran's extra dependent allowance into a new child payment.

VII.ii.1.B.7.b · Direct payment requires a distinct evidence and follow-up sequence

Send the required letter through the fiduciary for the child's address, unmarried status and school information, giving 60 days under EP 130. An adequate response requires the specified consolidated-fiduciary-file/hub checks before direct authorization; apply the table's actual majority and last-paid-date boundaries.

Without a response, propose the supported later-of-birthday/last-school-confirmation date with EP 600 and the 60-day opportunity/65-day control. Continued nonresponse at that stage leads to the table's last-paid-date suspension, followed by the six-month work item/discontinuance sequence; it is not the same immediate final-removal sequence as ordinary annual school certification.

Evidence within the specified year after the last request follows the supported resumption/direct-payment steps. A later submission requires the B.1.c date review. Keep the actual fiduciary, payee, request and award records linked; a complete branch implementing this specialized direct-payment procedure remains separate from school verification.

VII.ii.1.B.7.c · The correct signer depends on the award and legal capacity

The Veteran signs for a child on the Veteran's award; a legally authorized majority child signs for the child's own/apportioned benefit, while the appropriate fiduciary signs for a minor. The source describes survivor and recognized-representative qualifications and the authorized VA employee completion exception. Do not accept every relative's signature merely because the child attends school.

VII.ii.1.B.8.a · A paid DEA/Fry election normally remains final

Once the education benefit is actually paid, stopping it does not generally reopen adult capable-child dependency entitlement. Review the specified erroneous-payment exception and narrow historical two-parent conditions where applicable. The under-18/incapacity qualifications remain governed by the related blocks; do not describe all education eligibility as an irrevocable paid election.

VII.ii.1.B.8.b · Check actual payment before denying on election grounds

Verify whether education benefits were actually paid and their effective beginning date through the required inquiry. Mere eligibility is insufficient. Supported dependency periods before the paid election, including qualifying normal breaks, may remain payable, subject to the actual age/status exceptions.

X.ii.6.B.1.a · Incapacity must have begun before eighteen

An otherwise qualifying child over 18 can remain eligible through permanent incapacity for self-support that began before 18, or through the separate qualifying-school rules before 23. Establish the child's actual legal relationship and relevant condition; a present disability alone does not establish the historical requirement.

X.ii.6.B.1.b · The prescribed claim rule applies to incapacity

Since March 24, 2015, the allegation must be on an appropriate prescribed application. A wrong-form allegation needs the request-for-application process. Do not create the premature-valid-claim diary merely because an informal document mentions incapacity.

X.ii.6.B.1.c · Develop how the child functioned before eighteen and now

Ask about ordinary tasks and self-care, the condition's extent before 18 and currently, schooling and maximum grade, improvement, employment with nature/dates/earnings, marriage and present circumstances. Relevant historical medical and functional evidence matters more than a diagnostic label by itself.

X.ii.6.B.1.d · Statements must explain personal knowledge

The person providing evidence should identify the facts personally observed, when they occurred and the basis of knowledge about the child's condition at 18 and now. Obtain the required identifying/signature information; a bare conclusion of helplessness does not supply the factual history.

X.ii.6.B.1.e · Defer a valid claim more than three months before eighteen

Do not request incapacity evidence or refer to rating more than three calendar months before the eighteenth birthday. For a valid prescribed premature claim, send the deferred-consideration information and establish local diary 03 to mature at the appropriate pre-birthday point. A fixed 90-day calculation is not the same as three calendar months.

X.ii.6.B.1.f · At diary maturity establish the proper claim work

Use the appropriate benefit-specific claim control created at maturation, provide any required notice and complete the needed development. Refer to rating when the relevant prerequisites and evidence are ready; diary maturity does not itself establish entitlement.

X.ii.6.B.1.g · Establish age and child relationship before medical referral

If the applicable modern form explicitly required missing age/relationship proof, apply its specified missing-proof disposition without rating referral, subject to relevant assistance obligations. Other required age/relationship development receives 30 days. If the proof remains absent after proper development, authorization denies that missing-status basis rather than asking rating to make a medical merits decision for an unestablished child.

X.ii.6.B.2.a · Do not duplicate evidence notice already supplied by the form

The prescribed form, such as 21-686c, may already provide the required evidence notice regardless of FDC status. Otherwise review whether adequate notice was given within the past year and whether the record supports grant without it; supply required notice where those conditions are not met. A 20-0995 uses the supplemental-claim notice/development rules.

X.ii.6.B.2.b · Examinations are not routine

Historical evidence usually controls incapacity before age 18. If an examination is necessary, including to resolve conflicting evidence, obtain Assistant Coach or higher approval and record it in the required VBMS note. Do not order an examination automatically from an incapacity checkbox or diary.

X.ii.6.B.2.c · Rating decides the self-support question under 3.356

The rating activity evaluates whether the child's own physical or mental condition permanently prevented self-support before age 18, using all relevant evidence. Employment must be considered in its actual nature and circumstances; casual, unsuccessful or sympathetic work is not automatic proof of independent support. Competency to handle funds is a separate determination.

X.ii.6.B.2.d · Supporting evidence determines the appropriate decision route

After age and relationship are established, adequate evidence permits a rating grant or denial on the merits; evidence needing further development leads to rating deferral. Where only an unsupported assertion remains after appropriate development, the source permits authorization denial for missing supporting evidence without a medical rating decision. A favorable rating addresses any required separate competency finding.

X.ii.6.B.2.e · Future incapacity review is unusual and needs approval

Compelling evidence suggesting future self-support can justify a review, with Assistant Coach or higher approval recorded in a VBMS note and the rating narrative. Set code 03 for the approved review 2–5 years after the finding. At expiration use EP 020 for compensation/DIC or EP 120 for pension and send to rating to decide examination or other development; do not automatically request an exam.

X.ii.6.B.3.a · Add the supported child to qualifying compensation without an age cutoff

When the Veteran qualifies for additional dependent compensation, implement the favorable incapacity finding. Apportionment follows the applicable minor-child approach but without a future age-based termination solely because the child grows older.

X.ii.6.B.3.b · Veteran pension uses its own dependency and income treatment

The source distinguishes the protected-pension dependency rules and the applicable pension award/income requirements. Use that benefit's conditions; compensation's qualifying-percentage rule and rate structure do not supply the pension result.

X.ii.6.B.3.c · Survivor pension has separate spouse and child award rules

Add the otherwise qualifying incapacitated child to the surviving spouse's pension when appropriate; a child's own entitlement depends on the specified survivor custody and entitlement facts. Review the actual survivor award rather than automatically using the compensation dependent allowance.

X.ii.6.B.3.d · Adult incapacitated-child DIC is a separate award

A child at least 18 who qualifies through permanent incapacity receives the described DIC in the child's own right. Coordinate it with any surviving-spouse award and the actual fiduciary/competency conditions.

X.ii.6.B.3.e · Rating entitlement and authorization payment dates have different owners

Rating establishes the incapacity entitlement date; authorization applies the actual payment rules, including 3.403(a)(1), claim timing and dependency rules. Continuation from age 18 requires the specified timely claim conditions; a late claim does not automatically backdate to 18. A supported school award transitioning to incapacity follows VII.ii.1.B.4.e.

X.ii.6.B.3.f · Use fiduciary procedures only for the actual legal condition

For a minor payee or a child both incapable of self-support and incompetent, follow the appropriate fiduciary award procedure. A permanent-incapacity finding alone does not mean the adult is incompetent to manage money.

X.ii.6.B.3.g · Explain the actual decision and next steps

Provide the required decision notice describing the issue, evidence, reasons and applicable review rights. Accurately distinguish a missing-proof authorization disposition from a rating denial on the medical merits.

X.ii.6.B.4.a · Marriage generally ends this child entitlement too

Permanent incapacity does not ordinarily override the requirement that a child remain unmarried. Check the narrow historical Spanish-American War/Indian War 3.950 exception where relevant rather than describing marriage as an exception-free rule.

X.ii.6.B.4.b · Marriage removal does not need a new medical rating

The child's own/apportioned benefit generally ends from the first day of the marriage month; a dependent-child allowance uses the applicable relationship/removal rule. Verify the actual notice and historical qualifications. Do not send the case to rating solely to confirm that marriage occurred.

X.ii.6.B.4.c · Restoration after marriage requires the limited dissolution rules

Restoration following the specified pre-November 1, 1990 death/divorce or a qualifying void/annulled marriage requires both the applicable 3.55 conditions and continued incapacity. A modern divorce alone is not enough. Develop the actual legal ending and supported entitlement period.

X.ii.6.B.4.d · A later court competency finding warrants rating review

If a court finds competent a child VA previously rated incompetent, rating must consider whether incapacity for self-support still exists. Competency and self-support are related factual inquiries but are not the same legal finding; do not automatically stop payment from the court order alone.

X.ii.6.B.4.e · A survivor's entitlement ending may change the child's payee

When the surviving spouse's award ends, the remaining child's own benefit and payment arrangement must be reviewed. A mental-incapacity case may need a competency determination; physical incapacity does not automatically prevent direct payment to an otherwise competent adult. Apply the source's survivor and fiduciary sequence, including any needed deferral.

X.ii.6.B.5.a · This finding does not gain ordinary protected-rating status

The protection afforded certain disability ratings by 38 U.S.C. 110 does not apply to a permanent-incapacity-for-self-support rating. That does not permit an unsupported or notice-free reduction; the actual review and payment protections still apply.

X.ii.6.B.5.b · Check school eligibility before ending the child award

A child who is now capable of self-support may still qualify through approved school attendance before the age cutoff. Determine that possibility before discontinuing the child benefit, rather than assuming an adverse incapacity finding resolves school entitlement.

X.ii.6.B.5.c · Develop, obtain rating findings and preserve both notice stages

When employment or other facts suggest regained self-support, develop duties, income, hours, permanence, temporary/therapeutic work and other pertinent evidence. Use EP 020 for compensation/DIC or EP 120 for pension and a 30-day development period; a response or expiration permits rating referral. A request to remove an otherwise eligible child without marriage or possible regained self-support is a prohibited partial renouncement under 3.106, not automatic removal.

If rating confirms continuing incapacity, notify and continue supported benefits. If it finds regained capacity, a qualifying beneficiary report can permit skipping the advance proposal. Otherwise send the specified proposal with 60 days for evidence and a 65-day control; review a response promptly. A hearing requested within 30 days must be held and resulting development completed before the final rating stage.

Obtain the required final rating review of the proposed action. If incapacity remains, notify and retain entitlement; if cessation is affirmed, review possible school eligibility and implement the correct benefit-specific date. Pension uses the actual last-paid date. Compensation first becomes nonpayable on the first day of the month after the separate 60-day period measured from the final decision notice ends. That final-notice payment period still matters when a direct beneficiary report allowed bypassing the advance proposal. Do not use the employment date or earlier proposal date as the compensation cutoff. Provide the supported final decision/award notice.

III.i.1.B.1.a · Check the full obligation, not just a 24-month total

The minimum can be 24 continuous months or the full period called or ordered to active duty. Applicability depends on original regular-component enlistment after September 7, 1980, or active-duty entry after October 16, 1981, together with the prior-service conditions stated here. For delayed entry, use actual active-duty entry. Check the exact benefit, dates and exceptions before applying a restriction.

III.i.1.B.1.b · Short service does not by itself bar compensation

Benefits for or in connection with a service-connected disability or death remain available even when minimum active duty was not completed. The article also preserves insurance and specified education refunds. This exception does not itself establish qualifying service, a favorable COD or service connection; those questions still require their own findings.

III.i.1.B.1.c · Verify a real exception to the minimum

Exceptions include qualifying hardship or dependency, statutory early-out, supported disability discharge, compensable service-connected disability, and specified Reserve disability releases. If hardship is alleged but the discharge document is unclear, develop it. Do not assume any early discharge or disability label satisfies the statute.

Section 1171 applies to enlisted members, not officers. The source lists 21 months for Army and 33 months for the other listed branches, but its later general document-acceptance sentence says 21 months. Where those statements conflict in the actual case, clarify the controlling branch restriction rather than treating the general sentence as permission to disregard it.

III.i.1.B.1.d · Preserve entitlement established before the statute

The minimum-duty restriction does not extinguish entitlement to benefits established before enactment of 38 U.S.C. 5303A. Review when entitlement was established and the actual benefit; do not use a later minimum-service screening to undo an earlier protected entitlement.

III.i.1.B.2.a · Use acceptable evidence already in the record first

Review existing service and discharge evidence before requesting verification through PIES, VIS or DPRIS. Verify relevant service periods and character rather than assuming one period represents all service. BDD processing has a specific exception: do not defer the current-period claim simply to await post-discharge service verification.

III.i.1.B.2.b · A former-POW indication requires its own procedure

When evidence indicates possible former-prisoner-of-war status, follow the linked former-POW development and determination rules. A service verification response alone does not resolve every POW-status question or the special benefits that may depend on that finding.

III.i.1.B.2.c · Travel can matter, but do not estimate an extension

Active service continues through midnight on the discharge date. Authorized direct travel after discharge can affect eligibility when certified by the service department. Do not routinely request travel certification for less than 80 days of service unless the claimant raises the issue or unusual circumstances, such as overseas discharge, justify inquiry.

III.i.1.B.2.d · Ask for the exact travel coverage when injury timing matters

For a disabling injury within 11 days after discharge, request service-department certification of whether authorized travel covered the precise date and hour. Eleven days is an inquiry trigger, not an automatic extension of active service. Use the prescribed verification channel and the actual certified entitlement.

III.i.1.B.2.e · PHS separation dates already account for travel

Accept Public Health Service separation dates as including travel time. Adding a second estimated travel period would count the same entitlement twice.

III.i.1.B.3.a · Check the actual document and its reliability

Use the original table of acceptable discharge/service documents. A genuine, unaltered claimant copy can be acceptable, but a post-June-1979 DD 214 Member Copy 1 is not adequate because required discharge information is missing. An NGB 22 does not establish the dates of a particular active-duty activation.

An otherwise acceptable digitally signed discharge document dated August 1, 2008, or later can use the specified 10-digit identifier. Review continuous-active-service remarks, which may identify service before the displayed entry date. If a DD 214 is inside an STR document, identify it in the document subject/bookmark as directed so it can be found again.

III.i.1.B.3.b · Know when a DD 214 is issued and where to find it

The listed situations include release from active service, recalled retirees reverting to retirement, separation for cause or physical disability regardless of service length, and specified training/support duty of at least 90 days or a shorter period required by the Secretary. Reserve contingency activation over 30 days and certain active-service status/component changes also qualify. Use the exact issuance rules rather than assuming every Reserve duty period produces a DD 214.

Service departments provide the certificate when a claim is filed at separation or the member is released. Before HAIMS deployment on January 1, 2014, it was included with STRs. If the certified DD 214 is inside the STR document, identify it in the subject line or bookmark so another reviewer can find it.

III.i.1.B.3.c · Read VADIR fields according to what they represent

VADIR can supply electronic DD 214 and service information through VIS. Guard/Reserve unit-membership spans are not automatically the dates of a specific active-duty activation. For the stated retiree discrepancy, VIS reflects the last paid active-duty date and the manual directs the one-day adjustment; this is not a general license to change every separation date.

III.i.1.B.3.d · An unverified-service denial needs an administrative decision

If qualifying service cannot be verified after warranted development for a compensation claim, prepare the required administrative decision before denying. Account for attempted verification and available evidence, apply the approval requirements, and document the actual findings rather than treating an unanswered request as proof of ineligibility.

III.i.1.B.3.e · Explain why supplied evidence cannot establish service

When the evidence is unacceptable and service cannot be verified, explain the unsuccessful verification, the evidence that could establish service and the claimant’s review rights. Give an understandable reason tied to the particular document or missing fact instead of merely stating that the claim lacks a DD 214.

III.i.1.B.4.a · Pursue supported alternative sources

Ask about personal military records and follow relevant leads through SSA, state offices, former employers, the Railroad Retirement Board, county courthouses, adjutants general or military rosters as appropriate. These are possible evidence sources, not a mandatory request list for every claim. Record which leads were relevant and what they produced.

X.iv.1.A.1.a · Discharge character affects basic eligibility

VA generally requires discharge under conditions other than dishonorable for the relevant service. The military’s discharge label and VA’s statutory eligibility determination are related but not identical. Identify the period supporting the benefit and apply the actual statutory or regulatory criteria.

X.iv.1.A.1.b · COD is a VA benefits determination

A COD determination decides whether service is qualifying for VA purposes and whether a benefits bar applies. It does not change the military discharge certificate. A person seeking a military discharge correction uses the military review process separately.

X.iv.1.A.1.c · Development handles COD; rating handles a properly raised insanity question

The development activity generally develops and makes the administrative COD determination. When insanity is claimed or properly raised, obtain the rating activity’s insanity disposition under X.iv.2.A before completing COD. Sending the entire matter to rating without identifying the needed question does not replace the administrative work.

X.iv.1.A.1.d · Identify why a determination is requested

COD may arise with a benefits claim, a request from another VA business line or agency, or a former service member’s standalone request under 5303B. The standalone request does not require a prescribed form or benefits application. For another entity’s request, check whether an existing decision already covers the period before creating a duplicate determination.

X.iv.1.A.1.e · Some discharge circumstances generally require a review

OTH/undesirable, bad-conduct, dismissal and dishonorable discharges generally require COD development when the benefit depends on that service. Void enlistment and dropped-from-rolls cases require examination of the actual facts and discharge circumstances. Do not assign the result from the label alone.

X.iv.1.A.1.f · Other discharge labels normally do not require COD

Honorable, general under honorable conditions and qualifying entry-level uncharacterized separations generally establish an acceptable character without a new COD determination. A statutory-bar reason or the specified T38, 953, BEO and DRO indicators can require further facts even with a favorable characterization. General-under-honorable-conditions service involving drug use alone does not create a statutory bar.

X.iv.1.A.1.g · Do not decide unrelated service prematurely

A separate clearly qualifying period may support the benefit sought without deciding the character of another period. First identify which service actually supports the issue. If that relationship is uncertain, resolve it; do not assume either that all service is barred or that an unrelated honorable period supports every claim.

X.iv.1.A.1.h · Follow the complete COD sequence

Obtain the necessary facts, provide the approved advance notice and response opportunity, develop and obtain any properly raised insanity determination, then prepare the administrative COD decision addressing applicable bars and exceptions. Obtain required approval, carry out the appropriate control/benefit actions, send decision notice and update the systems.

While COD eligibility remains unresolved, generally limit development to the facts and circumstances needed for that determination. Do not send ordinary merits-development letters or order unrelated examinations and records simply because a compensation claim is pending. The internal COD Information Page supplies the approved notice instructions; this article does not establish a universal 60- or 65-day COD clock.

X.iv.1.A.1.i · Develop the actual reasons and circumstances of discharge

Seek the relevant service records, conduct history and discharge facts using the appropriate records channel. Review evidence from the claimant and supported leads. Do not repeat completed development or documented unsuccessful efforts without a reason such as a new relevant lead; identify exactly what remains missing.

X.iv.1.A.1.j · A bar needs supported findings on every required criterion

For each criterion, evidence supporting the bar must outweigh contrary evidence, the military record must clearly support the relevant facts, and the conduct or circumstances must be the discharge basis. Approximate balance does not establish that criterion. Missing records or an adverse label cannot substitute for this analysis.

X.iv.1.A.1.k · Use the prescribed COD decision template

Use the original template and select its applicable provisions for the actual service and asserted bars. Address the evidence, governing law, reasons, insanity when raised, compelling circumstances where applicable, each relevant period and any conditional-discharge or Chapter 17 findings. Do not paste in unsupported adverse provisions. The summary here is not replacement decision wording.

A new favorable COD decision uses the full template. The specific confirmed-prior-adverse procedure in 1.q uses VA Form 21-0961 remarks instead. Preserve the required distinctions and favorable findings when a result is not fully favorable.

X.iv.1.A.1.l · State favorable findings when the result is not wholly favorable

Identify facts or elements resolved in the claimant’s favor even when another criterion prevents the benefit. Explain their scope and supporting evidence. Do not omit them merely because the overall COD decision is adverse.

X.iv.1.A.1.m · Explain the individual period and exception findings

State the issue as Character of discharge, not Statutory bar or Regulatory bar as separate co-issues. Discuss both the service-department and claimant evidence in relation to each raised bar and relevant mitigation. Complete the administrative decision using the actual service chronology and applicable criteria. Explain any conditional-discharge periods and the relevant health-care result, and address insanity or other exceptions when raised. Use the required approval and documentation procedures rather than a general note that simply says COD reviewed.

X.iv.1.A.1.n · Send a decision notice that explains the consequences

Attach the administrative decision and explain its effect on benefits, applicable military discharge-review options and VA review rights. For an existing compensation claim with Chapter 17 eligibility, continue treatment-purpose service-connection development for all contentions without requiring a new 21-526EZ. With only a standalone request and no compensation application, invite a claim on the prescribed form.

X.iv.1.A.1.o · Continue the appropriate claim after Veteran status is established

After a favorable eligibility determination, perform the authorized control action and continue the pending benefits claim through its proper development or adjudication procedure. A favorable standalone COD decision does not itself grant a disability benefit or authorize payment; the actual benefit still requires a claim and its entitlement findings.

X.iv.1.A.1.p · Respect a prior final decision and identify a valid review basis

A favorable final COD finding is binding within its scope; a change in misconduct regulations alone is not a reason to redo it. Check the period, benefit and any treatment-only limitation. Older decisions receive the presumption of regularity; absent notice documentation alone does not establish clear procedural irregularity.

A pre-June-25-2024 adverse decision may receive one requested review under the revised criteria, on or after that date, without new and relevant evidence or a prescribed form. Identify whether that opportunity was already used, scan needed paper records and apply the proper finality/revision rules for other requests.

X.iv.1.A.1.q · Document whether the prior adverse result changes

If the review produces a favorable result, prepare the complete COD decision. If the adverse result remains, use the specified 21-0961 remarks procedure with a reasoned explanation of the legal and evidence/revision basis, including applicable new-and-relevant-evidence or CUE findings. If the old decision omitted Chapter 17, make the required decision on that unresolved question.

After a favorable standalone review, invite claims for previously denied issues; do not automatically readjudicate every old benefits claim without the required claim. Give the correct notice and review rights for the action actually taken.

X.iv.1.A.1.r · Use the revised criteria from June 25, 2024

The revision applies to pending and new matters as specified here. It removed the former homosexual-acts bar and expanded the compelling-circumstances review for certain bars. Apply the current text and the prior-final-decision rules together rather than assuming every old adverse result automatically reverses.

X.iv.1.A.1.s · Separate the COD finding from a benefits effective date

A COD eligibility finding itself has no effective date. A later award has its own effective-date requirements. Liberalizing-law retroactivity under 3.114 cannot precede the law and requires the stated prerequisites, including discharge before June 25, 2024. It is not an automatic one-year award for every newly favorable COD result.

X.iv.1.A.1.t · Consider compelling circumstances under the bars where they apply

This exception applies to the 180-day AWOL, moral-turpitude and willful-and-persistent-misconduct bars. Consider the quality and length of other service, relevant reasons for the conduct and any valid substantive legal defense. Relevant circumstances can include health or medication effects, combat hardship, assault, duress, family duties, age, maturity and discrimination.

One persuasively established relevant mitigating category can be sufficient. Competent, credible lay evidence need not be corroborated by military records; explain specific reasons for rejecting it. This broader review is distinct from legal insanity under 3.354: a mental or personality-related circumstance relevant here does not automatically satisfy the separate insanity definition.

X.iv.1.A.2.a · Identify the exact statutory bar

The statutory categories concern specified conscientious-objector refusal, general-court-martial sentence, officer resignation for the good of service, qualifying alienage, continuous AWOL of at least 180 days, and desertion. Read each criterion and the actual discharge basis. Insanity can remove a bar when established; compelling circumstances under this provision apply to AWOL, not indiscriminately to all statutory bars.

X.iv.1.A.2.b · A GCM sentence is different from another court-martial

The statutory bar requires discharge or dismissal by sentence of a general court-martial. A summary or special court-martial is not a GCM. Verify the actual court, sentence and discharge relationship, and resolve the separately raised insanity question before applying the bar.

X.iv.1.A.2.c · Alienage requires the particular statutory facts

Check alienage during the specified hostilities, the member’s request for release and whether the discharge was changed to honorable before January 7, 1957. If necessary, request evidence of the member’s release request; absent affirmative evidence after that development can support a favorable finding. Do not infer this bar simply from citizenship status.

X.iv.1.A.2.d · AWOL means a qualifying continuous absence

Verify exact dates and the nature of a continuous absence of at least 180 days resulting in an OTH discharge. Do not total separate absences or use the DD 214 Time lost total as proof; confinement is excluded from the AWOL calculation. Apply the compelling-circumstances and insanity exceptions when relevant.

X.iv.1.A.3.a · Regulatory bars also require their actual elements

The regulatory bars cover acceptance of an undesirable/OTH discharge to escape GCM trial, mutiny or espionage, moral turpitude, and willful and persistent misconduct. Review the current 3.12 text, required elements and exceptions. An adverse discharge characterization alone does not prove any one of these categories.

X.iv.1.A.3.b · A discharge in lieu of trial must involve GCM

Establish that the member accepted the qualifying discharge in lieu of trial by a general court-martial. A record referring only to special or summary court-martial does not establish this bar. Develop an unclear court type, apply reasonable doubt, and review any other independently supported bar separately.

X.iv.1.A.3.c · Evaluate moral turpitude from the acts and context

Apply the OGC 6-87 criteria for a willful act without justification or excuse, grave violation of moral standards and likely harm or loss, using the source’s liberal approach. A felony is not required, but not every offense qualifies. The article discusses minor conduct and exclusions such as one-time marijuana use and adultery.

Sexual/gender identity, HIV status or consensual sexual conduct between equal-grade/rank members alone is not an appropriate basis for this bar. Consider credible evidence even if the discharge paperwork does not state the discriminatory basis expressly. Review compelling circumstances and any properly raised insanity issue.

X.iv.1.A.3.d · One incident cannot be persistent misconduct

Separate the actual events: several offenses arising from one event count as one instance and cannot alone establish persistence. Use the current Manual for Courts-Martial Appendix 12 to classify seriousness; minor misconduct does not permit a dishonorable discharge or confinement over one year. Review minor/minor or minor/serious instances within two years, or serious/serious instances within five years.

Establish willful wrongdoing as well as persistence. Apply the identity-related exclusions, compelling circumstances and properly raised insanity rules. Do not use an obsolete punishment table, number of charge codes or discharge label as a shortcut to an adverse finding.

X.iv.1.B.1.a · Certain adverse discharges still allow treatment-purpose benefits

A former service member with the specified OTH service may be eligible under Chapter 17 for disabilities incurred or aggravated in line of duty during that service. A statutory bar or bad-conduct discharge can prevent this limited eligibility. It is a separate result from compensation eligibility, not a payment award.

X.iv.1.B.1.b · Consider 3.360 after an adverse COD finding

Make the treatment-purpose determination when the administrative COD result finds the relevant service dishonorable for VA purposes and the 3.360 question therefore remains. Address the actual period, statutory-bar status and discharge type in the decision.

X.iv.1.B.1.c · Do not impose a treatment-only bar after Veteran status is established

When the COD analysis already establishes Veteran status, do not separately deny health-care eligibility under 3.360. This includes an established insanity exception that removes the underlying bar, even when the military discharge was bad conduct. Apply the actual favorable eligibility finding.

X.iv.1.B.1.d · Distinguish statutory bars and bad-conduct discharges

After an adverse primary COD result, use the source’s exact table to distinguish a statutory bar or bad-conduct discharge from an OTH discharge barred only under the applicable regulatory provisions. State the correct Chapter 17 finding for the period; do not assume that every adverse COD decision also bars treatment.

X.iv.1.B.1.e · Continue the right application after a treatment-only result

For a pending compensation application, continue developing all claimed conditions for treatment-purpose service connection without asking for another 21-526EZ. If the claimant requested only COD and has no compensation application, send the form and invite the conditions requiring review. The treatment-only result does not establish service connection for each disability.

X.iv.1.B.2.a · An early reenlistment may preserve an earlier qualifying obligation

Section 101(18) can treat a completed initial obligation as an unconditional discharge when its requirements are met, even though early reenlistment prevented an actual discharge at that point. Obtain the real obligations and conduct history; a single continuous DD 214 does not settle this question.

X.iv.1.B.2.b · Look for indicators of an earlier obligation

Prior active-service entries, reenlistments, extended continuous service and unclear contract history can raise a conditional-discharge question. Develop the initial and subsequent enlistment obligations and relevant dates when needed. Do not rely only on the date of the final adverse discharge.

X.iv.1.B.2.c · Separate genuinely separate service from conditional periods

A complete separate period has a break greater than one day under this article; its example ends one period September 3 and starts the next September 5. If a separate qualifying period supports the benefit, avoid an unnecessary determination on unrelated service. For continuous service, decide whether the verified obligation history requires a conditional-discharge analysis.

X.iv.1.B.2.d · Calculate from obligation endpoints

Establish the initial obligation’s completion date. Add the full length of each succeeding contract to the prior obligation endpoint, not to an actual early reenlistment date. Compare those endpoints with actual release and misconduct dates, and obtain required service-department certification instead of guessing contract lengths.

X.iv.1.B.2.e · The worked example supplies specific assumed facts

The example begins December 29, 1980, with a four-year obligation and subsequent six-year obligations; actual release is December 23, 1991, with AWOL beginning February 14, 1991. These are teaching facts, not a rule that every long continuous enlistment has the same contract structure or discharge result.

X.iv.1.B.2.f · Follow the example’s obligation calculations

The four-year initial obligation ends December 28, 1984. Adding six years gives December 28, 1990, and the next six-year obligation would end December 28, 1996. Review which obligations were completed and when the relevant conduct began. Any present-day bar determination must also apply current criteria and exceptions.

X.iv.1.B.2.g · The alternative view illustrates the same chronology

The alternative presentation shows the same completed obligations and later uncompleted period. Use it to check that early reenlistment dates have not shifted the endpoints incorrectly. It does not authorize a different calculation or remove the need to establish the claimant’s actual service and contract facts.

X.iv.1.B.2.h · State the separate period findings in the decision

Use the sample language with the verified facts to identify which service is qualifying and which period remains subject to an adverse finding, including the applicable treatment-purpose result. Explain the obligation calculation and reasons. Do not copy the sample’s adverse facts into an unrelated claim.

X.iv.1.B.2.i · Benefit dates remain separate from conditional eligibility

Apply the linked effective-date rules after the conditional-discharge determination and required certification. Compensation is not payable during later active service, even if that later service is barred. Coordinate the actual benefit dates and active-service payment restriction rather than paying continuously across all periods.

X.iv.1.B.3.a · Uncharacterized separation has several categories

Distinguish entry-level separation, void enlistment and dropped-from-rolls cases. They do not all have the same eligibility consequences; determine the actual category from the service records.

X.iv.1.B.3.b · Apply the procedure for the actual uncharacterized category

A qualifying entry-level separation is under honorable conditions for this purpose and ordinarily needs no COD determination; update the discharge information as directed. Void enlistment requires the facts and 3.14 analysis. Dropped from the rolls may occur without an actual discharge, so verify the discharge, reason and any adverse pattern before choosing the procedure.

X.iv.1.B.4.a · Recognize a clemency certificate

A DD Form 1953 identifies a clemency discharge under the described program. It does not itself establish honorable service or automatically restore VA benefits; retain and review the underlying discharge and program information.

X.iv.1.B.4.b · Clemency still requires the applicable COD analysis

Develop the underlying facts and determine benefits eligibility under the controlling COD rules. Do not treat the clemency certificate as a military-board correction that necessarily removes the original bar.

X.iv.1.B.4.c · Identify which authority actually upgraded the discharge

Review the DD 214/215 remarks, review-board documentation, program and dates to establish the upgrade authority. Different correction and special-review programs have different legal effects. Obtain missing documentation rather than assuming every upgraded certificate has identical consequences.

X.iv.1.B.4.d · A correction board and a discharge review board are different

A Board for Correction of Military Records decision has the final, conclusive effect specified here. A discharge review board acts under a different statute, with the additional restrictions and historical rules described in this article. Identify the actual board before deciding the effect of its action.

X.iv.1.B.4.e · A DRB upgrade may not remove a statutory bar

Apply the rules for the date and type of DRB action. An upgrade on or after October 8, 1977, does not remove the 3.12(c) statutory bars. Historical upgrades and program exceptions need the original provisions; do not extend a favorable upgrade beyond its legal effect.

X.iv.1.B.4.f · A substituted discharge does not erase a GCM sentence

An administrative substitution under 10 U.S.C. 874(b) does not remove the fact that discharge resulted from a general-court-martial sentence. Apply the COD criteria and exceptions to that underlying basis rather than treating the new certificate alone as conclusive eligibility.

X.iv.1.B.4.g · Keep the evidence of the change in the claim record

Document the discharge change and its supporting authority in the claims record and update the relevant service information. Preserve what changed, the period affected and the resulting VA determination; a revised system field alone is not the evidence or the administrative decision.

X.iv.1.B.3.h · Special-program upgrades need the PL 95-126 review

The source prints this heading as X.iv.1.B.3.h even though it is located under Topic 4; that source identifier is retained here. Specified special-program upgrades require the uniform-standard second review unless an exception applies. Use the original program/date rules rather than accepting the special upgrade automatically.

X.iv.1.B.4.i · Check the stated special-review exemptions

The stated exemptions include the relevant prior general discharge or favorable VA decision made before October 8, 1977. Confirm the actual prior discharge and decision dates before treating a case as exempt from PL 95-126’s special-review restrictions.

X.iv.1.B.5.a · Determine whether the special upgrade received a second review

For the covered special-program DRB upgrade, determine whether the required review under uniform standards has occurred. Obtain the second-review result or follow the prescribed development if it is missing. A first special-program upgrade is not proof of the later uniform-standard finding.

X.iv.1.B.5.b · Read the exact DD 215 narrative

Use the specified DD 215 narrative to distinguish a favorable individual-case uniform-standard determination from an unfavorable review. Preserve the actual wording and supporting documents; do not decide the second-review result from a generic upgraded-discharge label.

X.iv.1.B.5.c · Apply a favorable second review within its legal scope

A favorable uniform-standard determination can support benefits eligibility under the stated program rules. Verify any remaining statutory bar and the other entitlement requirements. The favorable board action does not itself grant a pending disability claim.

X.iv.1.B.5.d · A favorable second review does not remove 3.12(c)

When a statutory bar is involved, apply it and its applicable exceptions despite the favorable DRB second review. Determine the actual statutory criterion from the service and discharge evidence; do not assume either that every statutory bar survives an applicable exception or that the upgrade removes it.

X.iv.1.B.5.e · Use the special unfavorable-DRB notice sequence

For this particular unfavorable second-review situation, provide the required advance adverse notice. The article directs the next determination when evidence arrives or 65 days have passed, whichever comes first. Review the evidence and applicable response protections before action; this is not a universal 65-day deadline for all COD requests. Then complete the proper decision, benefit adjustment and notice process.

X.iv.1.B.5.f · Use the specific effective-date comparison

For a favorable second review, compare the date of the review application and the VA claim as directed. Supplemental situations add the stated prior-claim/one-year comparison under the applicable effective-date rules. Review all relevant claim and military-review dates; do not substitute the date the new DD 215 was scanned or award an automatic year of retroactive benefits.

X.iv.1.F.1.a · Authorization develops the proposed CUE basis first

When a COD, line-of-duty or willful-misconduct administrative decision contains a proposed clear and unmistakable error affecting established service connection, the authorization activity has the initial jurisdiction described here. Prepare and properly approve a specific administrative explanation of the alleged error before the rating referral. A later disagreement with how evidence was weighed is not automatically CUE.

X.iv.1.F.1.b · Rating handles the required severance proposal

After the properly prepared administrative determination, the rating activity follows the applicable 3.105(c) and (d) severance procedures. The development review does not itself sever service connection, stop payments or replace the required proposal and notice protections.

X.iv.1.F.1.c · Escalate an unresolved jurisdictional disagreement as prescribed

If authorization and rating disagree, use the prescribed memorandum and Veterans Service Center Manager resolution process. Document the specific issue and evidence rather than silently changing the decision or routing the claim repeatedly without resolving the disagreement.

X.iv.2.A.1.a · Legal insanity can change a benefits bar

Insanity at the time of the relevant conduct can remove an otherwise applicable bar or misconduct consequence under the governing law. The legal definition in 3.354 concerns disease-related deviation, disturbance of the peace or antisocial departure from accepted standards. It is not equivalent to any mental-health diagnosis, and personality disorder or mental deficiency alone does not supply the qualifying disease.

X.iv.2.A.1.b · Identify an allegation or evidence that actually raises the issue

Insanity is at issue when specifically alleged or when an employee identifies evidence meeting the described threshold; the article also addresses suicide in the separate death-benefit setting. A diagnosis by itself is insufficient. Distinguish this legal issue from the broader consideration of mental or personal circumstances that may mitigate certain COD bars.

X.iv.2.A.1.c · Develop the evidence about the time of the conduct

Obtain the relevant service and post-service treatment evidence, court or board proceedings and other material bearing on the person’s condition at the offense time. Complete warranted development before referral. Do not seek unrelated lifelong medical history without relevance, or assume a current care arrangement proves the legal definition during earlier service.

X.iv.2.A.1.d · Ask rating for the defined insanity disposition

Refer a claimed or properly raised and developed insanity issue to rating for the necessary COD/LOD determination. Rating may return a case with a VBMS note when the issue is not properly raised. The legal question does not ordinarily require a routine psychiatric opinion; use the actual evidence and prescribed rating procedure.

X.iv.2.A.1.e · An insanity-only rating does not need a separate decision notice

When rating addresses only insanity for this administrative matter, do not issue a separate notice of that rating. The ultimate COD or other administrative notice conveys the resulting determination and required review rights, including discussion of unfavorable insanity findings as applicable.

X.iv.2.A.1.f · Development still completes the administrative decision

After the rating disposition, apply it to the relevant conduct and period and finish the required administrative determination. Explain its effect in the administrative decision and notice. A rating finding on insanity is not by itself the complete COD decision or a grant of the claimed benefit.

X.v.1.C.1.a · Identify when an administrative decision is required

The listed administrative issues include basic eligibility and other non-rating factual/legal determinations. Use the specific procedure for the actual issue, including COD, service verification, relationship or misconduct questions. A general checklist cannot replace a determination the manual specifically requires.

X.v.1.C.1.b · Use the activity responsible for the issue

The development activity generally makes these determinations, with the organizational responsibilities and exceptions specified in the manual. Route a rating question to rating when required, but do not assume that every unusual eligibility issue is itself a rating decision.

X.v.1.C.1.c · Respect the finality of an existing determination

An administrative decision binds later action within its factual and legal scope, subject to the authorized review or revision mechanisms. Read the prior issue, period and findings. Do not reverse an established fact simply because another processor would have evaluated the record differently.

X.v.1.C.2.a · Develop the facts and use the issue’s controlling rules

Review the available evidence, obtain necessary development and resolve the actual administrative issue under the applicable law and manual procedure. Specific issue requirements take precedence over these general instructions. Make a supported determination rather than using a form as a substitute for analysis.

X.v.1.C.2.b · Make the written record explain the determination

Document the evidence, relevant facts and legal reasoning sufficiently for another reviewer and the claimant to understand the result. Follow the issue-specific documentation procedure and retain the approved decision in the proper claims record.

X.v.1.C.2.c · Choose the required decision format

Use the administrative-decision format and its required elements unless a specific procedure prescribes another format. COD has its mandatory X.iv.1.A.1.k template, with the particular confirmed-prior-adverse exception in 1.q. Do not use a short general note when the issue requires the full format.

X.v.1.C.2.d · Include the issue, evidence, law, findings and reasons

Identify exactly what is being decided and the evidence considered, state the governing authorities and explain the factual/legal findings and result. Include required favorable findings and approval information. Tailor the decision to the actual question and period rather than leaving unrelated template language.

X.v.1.C.2.e · Write reasons that connect evidence to each finding

Explain why the evidence supports the result, address significant favorable and unfavorable material and the claimant’s contentions, and explain credibility or weight findings. Use understandable language. Listing records or quoting rules without connecting them to the case does not provide adequate reasons and bases.

X.v.1.C.2.f · Retain favorable findings even in an adverse result

Identify favorable findings as the applicable procedure requires, explaining which element was established and on what evidence. Their presence matters to later review; an overall denial does not make every subsidiary fact unfavorable.

X.v.1.C.2.g · Use the general template only where appropriate

The template organizes the administrative issue, evidence, decision, reasons and approval. Fill it with the actual findings and remove inapplicable material. Where the issue has its own mandatory template or specific alternate documentation, follow that more specific instruction.

X.v.1.C.2.h · Apply the actual signature authority

A certified GS-11-or-higher employee with the specified monthly quality review and granted single-signature authority may approve a fully favorable decision alone. Adverse decisions and decisions without that authority require the specified certified second reviewer; lower-graded preparers require the qualified GS-11-or-higher second signature.

COD and willful-misconduct decisions do not require an extra Coach signature beyond these requirements. Check the actual employee certification, authority and outcome; a job title or local custom alone is not proof of approval authority. Other issue-specific exemptions in the table remain their own rules.

X.v.1.C.2.i · Complete the actual electronic approval and upload

Use the required Level 1 special issue and ADMINCOD tracked item for COD, with the specified administrative-decision item for other issues. Complete the required 21-0961 electronic signatures and actual review/reassignment process in VBMS. Verify all signatures and upload the decision and form under the correct Administrative Decision document classification.

Follow the original system instructions for authorized signing and handling the working files. This tool does not collect credentials, sign decisions, change VBMS or replace the required system approval.

X.v.1.C.2.j · Explain an adverse decision and provide its review rights

Give the claimant the required notice and, for compensation, a copy of the administrative decision, explaining the actual result and review options. Follow any specific COD notice rule as well. Apply the current review-lane and new-and-relevant-evidence requirements where appropriate rather than copying obsolete evidence terminology or a pension-specific exception into a compensation notice.

III.i.1.A.1.a · Veteran status requires the specified service and discharge

A Veteran served in active military, naval, air or space service and was released under conditions other than dishonorable. Identify both the qualifying service and discharge basis. Other specially recognized groups use their own recognition provisions rather than assuming every government or military-related role qualifies.

III.i.1.A.1.b · Training can become active service through the qualifying disability

Active service includes active duty and qualifying ADT/IADT periods. ADT can qualify through disability from disease or injury incurred or aggravated in LOD. IADT normally requires injury or its aggravation, or acute myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest or stroke during training. Sexual assault can be an injury. Authorized direct travel has the separate requirements in 3.6(e).

III.i.1.A.1.c · Qualifying service includes potentially qualifying training

Qualifying service is a type that qualifies or potentially qualifies for benefits, including ADT or IADT with the appropriate claimed relationship. Do not call verified training no qualifying service simply because the disability-to-training connection remains to be decided. That relationship is a rating question after development.

III.i.1.A.1.d · Basic eligibility starts with the right person and service

For a living claimant, identify the claimant’s Veteran status. Survivor benefits depend on the deceased person’s qualifying status and the claimant’s qualifying relationship. These primary eligibility questions are distinct from whether a particular disability is service connected.

III.i.1.A.1.e · Verify periods, discharge and the benefit-specific requirements

After potential Veteran status is established, verify the service dates and discharge, including each training period supporting the claim. Resolve any necessary COD determination and the particular benefit’s other criteria. BDD is an exception to waiting for current-period verification: it is rated before discharge and must not be deferred solely for that verification.

III.i.1.A.1.f · Distinguish a service-verification denial from a rating denial

For compensation or DIC, no qualifying service or unverified service after required efforts uses an administrative lack-of-qualifying-service decision. A claim based on verified ADT/IADT receives a rating decision even if the claimed relationship is not established. Do not use an administrative denial to decide a failed medical or service-incurrence nexus.

The listed pension lack-of-service cases use a notification letter without this administrative decision requirement. Pension has different service criteria; those rules do not replace the compensation path.

III.i.1.A.1.g · Certified service dates are binding

Service-department findings on certified dates, including authorized revisions, bind VA. Reconcile inconsistent records through the appropriate verification or correction process. Do not silently replace certified dates with an estimate from a membership span, pay total or local preference.

III.i.1.A.1.h · Academies and preparatory schools have different status rules

Service as a cadet or midshipman at the named service academies is active duty. For the listed preparatory schools, a civilian or Guard/Reserve member entering solely to attend generally has ADT, but continued active duty afterward makes that preparatory time active duty under the stated exception. An already active member attending without release remains on active duty. Verify entry, release and continuation facts.

III.i.1.A.2.a · Initial training may occur in one or two periods

A new Guard/Reserve member without prior active service generally completes initial ADT for basic and job training. Split-option training separates it into two periods, often for students. Prior active members generally do not repeat initial training, but branch-transfer circumstances can differ. Use the actual orders and dates rather than assuming the membership start date equals continuous active service.

III.i.1.A.2.b · Traditional drills and annual training are not automatically active service

Traditional weekend drills are inactive duty training, called IADT in this article; initial and annual training are ADT. Such membership and training alone do not establish active-service Veteran status, but a qualifying disability or covered event can make the relevant period active service. Read the actual duty purpose instead of relying on an ambiguous abbreviation.

III.i.1.A.2.c · Separate activation, support duty and civilian technician work

Federal Title 10 activation, AGR, temporary ADS and extra training can occur in addition to traditional drills. Reserve AGR is under Title 10; Guard AGR is under Title 32. Title 5 dual-status technician work is civilian employment even when a uniform and continuing military membership are required; that civilian work is not qualifying military duty. The same person can separately perform qualifying drills or activation.

VA disability compensation/pension and ADT/IADT pay cannot be received concurrently for the same covered time. Identify the actual kind of service for both eligibility and payment handling; do not assume those classifications operate identically.

III.i.1.A.2.d · A short support order is not disproved by a missing DD 214

ADS is shown by actual orders. A DD 214 is routinely issued for ADS of at least 90 days, with stated shorter-period exceptions. Reserve operational-support ADS is active service regardless of length. Paid ADS requires the corresponding compensation waiver/adjustment; review the actual service and pay period. The article’s older cross-reference to III.i.1.B.5.a should be read against the current service-document article.

III.i.1.A.2.e · Verify dates and type using adequate consistent records

The detailed Retirement Points Annual Statement is especially useful, but other records may verify a period if they identify dates and duty type and do not conflict with the record. Examples include a complete DD 261 signed by final approval authority, duty-specific STR entries, orders, a pay stub or MMPA. Do not demand a single exclusive form.

NGB 22 records membership spans, not individual ADT/IADT periods. Reserve separation may have no formal separation document, and training is not characterized like an active-duty discharge. Some cross-references in this block use old numbering; verify the current service/COD authority rather than inventing a missing section.

III.i.1.A.2.f · A DD 261 is not required for every LOD finding

Consider all evidence. A formal LOD investigation is not mandatory for every injury or disease during training. LOD does not necessarily mean at the work station: AGR is continuous duty, 24 hours a day and seven days a week. Without indicated intentional negligence or willful misconduct, an AGR injury/disease is presumed in LOD. Direct travel uses 3.6(e).

III.i.1.A.2.g · Injury includes certain trauma and vaccination circumstances

Sexual assault during IADT can be an injury for a PTSD claim. A disabling condition resulting from a vaccination during IADT may also constitute injury; the source extends the anthrax precedent to other vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccination. Hearing-loss/tinnitus noise injury uses its specific procedure. These classifications preserve a possible theory; they do not automatically establish medical causation.

III.i.1.A.2.h · Soundness does not apply automatically to every training period

Check the actual service status and entrance-examination circumstances under the linked direct-service-connection rules and Smith. Do not automatically apply the regular-active-duty presumption to training or infer that an unavailable entrance examination proves the condition did not preexist service.

III.i.1.A.2.i · Presumptions require a service-status and specific-rule review

Ordinary presumptive provisions do not attach to training alone. The article identifies specific exceptions, including applicable 3.309 categories, qualifying Camp Lejeune service and the statutory COVID-19 training provisions. Once a qualifying SC grant makes the same training period active service, it may satisfy a later presumption’s requirements, but the particular duration and other criteria still apply.

The example uses an ADT period exceeding 90 days that became active service through a Camp Lejeune bladder-cancer grant and later supports consideration of ALS. It does not turn every training period into active service. Find the current COVID-19 chapter by title because this article retains an older chapter number.

III.i.1.A.2.j · Training aggravation requires the correct evidentiary burden

Without the qualifying active-service status, worsening during ADT/IADT alone does not trigger the ordinary aggravation presumption: develop whether that training caused the worsening. Once SC establishes the same period as active service, the article recognizes the aggravation presumption. Identify the precise period, preexisting condition and entry/worsening evidence so rating applies the correct standard.

III.i.1.A.2.k · Verify, develop, refer to rating and update only a granted period

First obtain sufficient personnel/duty evidence and complete necessary verification follow-ups. If status/type still cannot be verified after all development, document unavailability and the approved administrative decision. If service is verified, develop the compensation issue normally, including warranted examinations/opinions, and refer it to rating. A failure to establish SC on verified training is a rating denial with the required explanation, not an administrative no-service denial.

When rating grants on a qualifying ADT/IADT period, update that exact period as active service in VBMS Core before rating finalization, refresh the rating profile if needed, and identify the dates and reason in Codesheet SPECIAL NOTATIONS. Later claims on that same period use the established status while preserving specifically raised LOD issues and applicable presumptive criteria.

For an actual one-day training period, the system end-date entry uses the following day, with an explicit SPECIAL NOTATIONS statement that the service was only one day. This entry convention does not create an extra day of real service or payment. Authorization completes the claim after the actual rating and system records agree.

III.i.1.A.3.a · Reserve membership may contain several different duty periods

Traditional Reserve service includes initial ADT, periodic drills and annual ADT. The member may qualify for compensation/pension when the actual active-service criteria are met. Verify each relevant period instead of treating the entire membership span as active duty or rejecting it all as nonqualifying.

III.i.1.A.3.b · Full-time Reserve operational support can be active duty

Since 1955, Reserve full-time operational/support programs such as AGR and ADS can be active duty under Title 10. Establish that the actual duty was full time and operational/support rather than training. The program label alone is insufficient, and Guard Title 32 duty follows different eligibility rules.

III.i.1.A.3.c · Coast Guard Title 14 activation qualifies

Verified Coast Guard Reserve activation under Title 14 qualifies as active service for VA purposes. Do not reject it because the order lacks a Title 10 citation; identify the actual Coast Guard activation authority and period.

III.i.1.A.4.a · Guard eligibility depends on the actual service

Traditional Guard initial/annual training and drills may support Veteran status when the active-service criteria are met. Federal activation and specified full-time Title 32 duty require separate classification. Loan Guaranty has its own special eligibility provisions; it is not governed by this compensation screening alone.

III.i.1.A.4.b · Specified Title 32 Guard duty is ADT for eligibility

Full-time Guard duty under Title 32 sections 316 or 502–505 is ADT for service-connection eligibility, including operational AGR/ADS. It becomes active service when the statutory disability/death requirements are met. Full-time or operational does not by itself make Guard Title 32 duty ordinary active duty.

For non-training AGR/ADS payment termination and reinstatement, follow the separate active-service payment procedure. Training pay uses the drill-pay adjustment provisions. Mixed AGR/ADS and drill pay in one fiscal year requires the specific coordination rule; eligibility classification does not eliminate a payment-overlap review.

III.i.1.A.4.c · Title 10 training remains training when the orders say so

A Guard unit or individual activated for Federal active duty under Title 10 has qualifying service until deactivated. Do not routinely develop the activation’s purpose unless evidence indicates individual training. Some 12301(d) orders are ADT; if the DD 214 shows training, do not label the period ordinary active service solely because Title 10 appears.

III.i.1.A.4.d · Develop an unclear Guard duty authority

Review the DD 214 for whether the service was Title 10 or Title 32. If it does not establish the type, develop with the appropriate component. When the DD 214 or service-department response identifies both, the manual directs treatment as Title 10; retain any specifically established training-purpose distinction.

III.i.1.A.5.a · Use the right military pay-record request

Request needed pay records through AskDFAS. Army and Air/Space Force use Military Pay Records Requests and the date-range subcategory, with VA Claims as the reason when required. Marines use Separation Pay Verification / USMC VA DSP/Seps Pay Verification; Navy uses Separation Pay Verification / Navy Member Information. Describe the exact requested records in Special Instructions where directed.

Attach the required DD 214, DD 256, DD 257 or NGB 22. Coast Guard is the exception: ask the Compensation Service MilPay mailbox for assistance. Save the actual submitted request and keep its evidence control open until the response is reviewed.

III.i.1.A.5.b · Preserve a usable confirmation in the actual eFolder

Print the AskDFAS confirmation page to PDF rather than taking a screenshot, so its record-access hyperlink remains functional. Ensure the required passcode is retained on that page or through the prescribed VBMS annotation and use the correct indexing. This tool does not collect passcodes or claimant information; follow the authorized system instructions in the original.

X.iv.1.C.1.a · Misconduct requires deliberate wrongdoing, not just a technical violation

Willful misconduct involves conscious wrongdoing or a known prohibited act with knowledge or wanton/reckless disregard of probable consequences. A mere technical violation of a police regulation or ordinance is not necessarily misconduct. A favorable service finding binds VA unless patently inconsistent with the facts and VA law.

X.iv.1.C.1.b · The conduct must directly cause the disability at issue

Make a determination when entitlement is affected by a disability/death occurring under questionable circumstances. Misconduct is not determinative unless it was the proximate/direct cause. Establish the connection between conduct and injury rather than treating any unrelated prohibited act as a benefits bar.

X.iv.1.C.1.c · Do not routinely reopen a supported no-misconduct finding

Generally accept service findings of no misconduct unless the required contrary evidentiary basis exists. The no-routine-LOD-development circumstances in 6.c also apply. A new reviewer’s suspicion or preference for a different conclusion does not by itself justify rejecting the service finding.

X.iv.1.C.1.d · Survivors pension has a distinct eligibility rule

Survivors pension may be payable when an in-service death was outside LOD or due to misconduct if the relevant service and other pension criteria are met. Verify the requisite service under the pension procedure. Do not apply a compensation or DIC misconduct restriction indiscriminately to every survivor benefit.

X.iv.1.C.2.a · Simple drinking and an intoxication-caused injury are different

An adverse alcohol-related injury finding concerns deliberate excessive drinking and the direct, immediate consequences of undertaking tasks while impaired. Consider the actual conduct and causal evidence. An SC condition that involuntarily prevents control or comprehension can create the separate secondary-service-connection situation discussed in 3.b.

X.iv.1.C.2.b · Inconclusive evidence does not establish alcohol misconduct

Excessive indulgence must be the proximate cause of the disability/death. Review the facts carefully and avoid adverse findings from inconclusive evidence. Military discharge for alcohol-rehabilitation failure alone is not willful misconduct; the actual supporting misconduct and circumstances must be established.

X.iv.1.C.2.c · Read BAC with all evidence and the applicable law

The source’s historical table describes no presumed impairment at 0.00–0.05, neither presumption at 0.05–0.08, and presumed impairment at 0.08 or above. These overlapping boundary descriptions are not an automatic VA misconduct calculator. Consider laboratory timing and all other circumstances.

Its statement about all states adopting 0.08 describes historical law; it is not a current universal threshold. Utah adopted 0.05 effective December 30, 2018. Check the actual jurisdiction and incident-date law. Impairment or a per-se driving violation still does not alone prove deliberate wrongdoing proximately caused this disability.

X.iv.1.C.2.d · Resolve the inconsistent historical alcohol cutoff

This block uses November 5, 1990 for organic diseases secondary to chronic alcohol use. The controlling 38 CFR 3.301(a), C.4.a and C.6.f use claims filed after October 31, 1990. Do not automatically apply the isolated November 5 table to claims filed November 1–4; use the regulation and obtain the appropriate decision review. Preserve independently SC-related Allen exceptions and the actual prior award basis.

X.iv.1.C.3.a · A collision does not automatically require misconduct development

A determination may be needed when the claimant operated the vehicle or contributed to the accident, such as by interfering with the operator. Do not routinely develop misconduct without positive evidence of potential misconduct. Being injured as a passenger or simply having been in a car accident does not establish personal wrongdoing.

X.iv.1.C.3.b · Weigh the actual accident cause and possible involuntary SC effects

An adverse finding requires the preponderance of evidence that conscious wrongdoing or prohibited conduct caused the additional disability. An SC condition that involuntarily prevented control or comprehension may instead support secondary SC. Obtain and consider police evidence and any needed mental-state opinion.

Physical evidence can be important when testimony is unavailable or incomplete: consider skid marks, vehicle damage and final positions, debris and related circumstances. Do not treat those facts as a mechanical fault formula; connect the evidence to the applicable VA standard.

X.iv.1.C.3.c · Service findings matter, but VA applies its own legal standard

Give service findings, including no misconduct, their required effect and consideration. The ultimate VA determination rests on VA law, including wanton/reckless disregard of probable consequences. Do not assume a service disciplinary label independently answers the VA question.

X.iv.1.C.3.d · Consider combined factors and intervening causes

Review speed, distraction, substances and the other supported factors together. A combination may establish unreasonable and dangerous operation, but consider intervening mechanical defects, road defects or another person’s actions. Do not assume a single traffic violation or intoxicant entry was the proximate cause.

X.iv.1.C.4.a · Primary-abuse restrictions have dates and exceptions

For claims after October 31, 1990, the cited statutes restrict benefits for primary alcohol/drug abuse and its secondary effects. Read this with 4.h and X.iv.1.D’s Allen exception for abuse secondary to or symptomatic of an independently SC disability. Do not sever awards properly established under the former rules merely because the law changed.

The source also restricts claimed increases on the older primary-abuse secondary-effects basis, including adding a dependent. Verify the actual award basis and claim history; this is not a rule against every substance-related SC award. The original heading spaces the letter as 4. a; the citation is normalized here to 4.a.

X.iv.1.C.4.b · Use the law tied to the actual claim date

The change applies to initial and supplemental compensation/DIC claims filed after October 31, 1990. Claims received before November 1, 1990 use the former criteria. Identify the actual filing and prior-award history before applying the restriction or its exceptions.

X.iv.1.C.4.c · Alcohol abuse is use sufficient to cause disability

The definition concerns drinking in an amount over time sufficient to cause disability. It does not establish that every disease in a person who drinks resulted from abuse; causal evidence and the actual entitlement theory still matter.

X.iv.1.C.4.d · Drug abuse concerns prohibited or nonmedical intoxicating use

The definition includes illegal drugs, illicitly obtained prescriptions, prescribed or nonprescribed drugs used for a nonmedical purpose, and other substances used for intoxication. Read it with the therapeutic and accidental-use exclusions. A medication prescription or adverse treatment effect alone is not proof of abuse.

X.iv.1.C.4.e · Disease and suicide questions belong to rating

When the substance-related determination involves disease, a suicide attempt or death by suicide, rating decides and includes the determination in its formal rating decision. Other injury/circumstance determinations generally belong to authorization and require the prescribed administrative approval. Identify the actual issue instead of routing every substance-related case alike.

X.iv.1.C.4.f · Accidental medication use is not automatically abuse

Accidental or careless use of medication or other agents is not drug abuse unless caused by alcohol/illegal-drug intoxication or actual willful misconduct. Establish the cause of the medication incident; do not infer deliberate abuse simply from an overdose, prescribing error or unexpected effect.

X.iv.1.C.4.g · DIC requires its own prior-award and cause review

The table preserves possible DIC when death resulted from a disease/injury properly SC under pre-November-1990 law and describes the restriction for later alcohol/drug-related DIC claims. Read the actual cause and prior award with the applicable secondary-to-SC exceptions; this is a survivor determination, not an automatic compensation-development disposition.

X.iv.1.C.4.h · Primary-abuse consequences differ from abuse caused by an SC condition

The post-1990 restriction on secondary consequences of primary abuse does not eliminate the Allen route. If alcohol/drug abuse is established as part of or secondary to an independently SC condition, resulting disease/disability may be SC under 3.310. Develop the actual medical relationship rather than treating coexistence as causation.

X.iv.1.C.5.a · Decide whether the accidental injury really needs an administrative finding

Use the 6.c screening and the actual questionable circumstances. Administrative decisions formally resolve LOD/misconduct questions when required, but direct SC does not require a new administrative decision for every obvious accidental injury. Preserve the distinction between incident facts and the medical relationship of a current disability.

X.iv.1.C.5.b · Request an identified relevant police report

When the claimant or record identifies a potentially relevant police report, request it from the military installation for military police or the local civilian authority for a civilian report. The report may matter to the injury facts even if no formal misconduct finding is needed. Do not treat a police report as a PMR-contractor medical record.

X.iv.1.C.5.c · Use separate claimant and witness requests and real response periods

If personnel/treatment records do not establish the needed accident facts, ask the claimant how, when and where it happened, whether police reported it and who witnessed it. Attach 21-10210 and allow 30 days, omitting facts already of record. Send each identified witness a separate 21-10210 request with 30 days; inform the claimant and ask for assistance.

When a witness does not respond after the initial 30-day suspense, follow up and allow another 30 days. Once all required response periods and efforts are complete, route the accumulated evidence for the administrative determination unless material development remains. Accept a responsive 21-4138 instead of 21-10210 and do not follow up merely to change forms.

X.iv.1.C.5.d · A field examination follows exhausted ordinary efforts

Request a field examination when other efforts to obtain necessary information are exhausted and a material conflict or defect still requires resolution. Identify the precise unresolved fact under X.v.1.E. Do not use a field examination as the routine first request or assume unavailable records themselves prove misconduct.

X.iv.1.C.6.a · LOD jurisdiction follows the actual question

Authorization normally makes administrative LOD determinations. Rating handles disease, suicide attempts and death by suicide. Complete the relevant development and clearly identify the question for the responsible activity; a separate insanity-only determination has its own role.

X.iv.1.C.6.b · Document and approve the determination in the proper form

Prepare administrative findings for the required review/approval, and include rating-owned findings in the formal rating decision. Follow current X.v.1.C format and approval requirements; the source retains older paragraph numbering in some links. A general claims note does not replace required approval.

X.iv.1.C.6.c · Recognize cases that do not need routine LOD investigation

Ordinarily no new determination is required with a supported favorable formal/informal service finding, on-duty military-aircraft circumstances, clearly accidental injury without contrary misconduct/unauthorized-leave evidence, or verified full-time Title 32 AGR circumstances without misconduct. Car accidents require positive evidence of potential misconduct before routine misconduct development.

Accept service findings subject to the stated contrary-evidence/legal standard. Do not equate an accident, a missing report, ordinary off-duty time or a missing DD 261 with an adverse LOD circumstance.

X.iv.1.C.6.d · Make a formal VA determination when a real LOD dispute exists

A formal favorable or unfavorable determination is required when there is no service finding and legitimate misconduct circumstances, an adverse service LOD finding, or a favorable finding that may properly be questioned. Apply 3.1(m) to actual desertion/AWOL or qualifying confinement facts; ordinary leave or an arrest alone is not the same exclusion.

X.iv.1.C.6.e · An in-service death may have no completed service investigation

For deaths on or after January 1, 1957, service departments are not legally required to make a formal LOD finding, although they agreed to provide investigations/reports when requested. Ask for the specific known or likely record, or clearly state the factual question. Do not assume every death generated a formal investigation.

X.iv.1.C.6.f · Chronic-alcohol disease rules changed over time

Organic secondary effects of chronic alcohol use were treated differently before August 13, 1964, between that change and October 31, 1990, and for later claims. Review the actual filing date and the separate Allen secondary-to-SC exception in X.iv.1.D. The modern restriction does not itself authorize severing an older proper award.

X.iv.1.D.1.a · Drinking alone is not willful misconduct

Simple drinking does not establish misconduct. An intoxication-related adverse finding requires deliberate intoxication that proximately and immediately caused the disability/death. Apply the full incident analysis and relevant SC-related exceptions rather than treating a history of alcohol use as the determination.

X.iv.1.D.1.b · Primary alcoholism is not a basis for compensation

Primary alcoholism cannot itself establish or increase compensation or Veterans Pension under these provisions. This is distinct from the medically supported secondary-to-SC route in 1.d and 1.h. Establish which theory is actually raised before routing the claim.

X.iv.1.D.1.c · The definition concerns use sufficient to cause harm

Alcohol abuse can arise from use over time or sufficiently excessive use on one occasion causing disability or death. The definition does not prove causation in a particular claim; review the medical and factual evidence.

X.iv.1.D.1.d · An independently SC disability can support a secondary alcohol-use claim

Sufficient medical evidence must establish alcohol abuse as secondary to or symptomatic of an SC disability, with the required absence of willful misconduct. Resulting diseases/disabilities may also qualify under 3.310. The back-pain example depends on the medical finding that the SC pain caused the alcohol dependence; it is not an automatic grant based on simultaneous diagnoses.

X.iv.1.D.1.e · A personality disorder alone does not supply the secondary SC basis

Developmental/pathological personality disorders are not underlying SC psychiatric diseases for this compensation theory. Alcoholism attributed to a personality disorder cannot on that basis grant or increase compensation. It may raise a separate competency question, which follows its own evidence and decision procedure.

X.iv.1.D.1.f · Pre-August-1964 secondary effects use the former rule

Secondary alcohol effects were considered of misconduct origin before August 13, 1964. Do not use liberalizing-law provisions to award before that date on this basis. Review the actual historical filing and entitlement rules rather than applying a present-day rule without its date conditions.

X.iv.1.D.1.g · The intermediate historical period permitted certain secondary effects

For claims filed August 13, 1964 through October 31, 1990, substantiated organic secondary effects of chronic alcohol use were not considered misconduct under the then-applicable rules. Examples include liver, gastric, neuropathy and brain conditions. The evidence still had to establish the actual condition and basis for benefits.

X.iv.1.D.1.h · Keep the primary-abuse restriction, Allen exception and old awards distinct

For claims after October 31, 1990, the restriction concerns primary alcohol abuse and secondary disabilities caused by that primary abuse. Allen permits a different route when sufficient medical evidence shows abuse secondary to or symptomatic of an independently SC disability and the relevant misconduct requirements are satisfied. Substance use may also reflect worsening of an SC condition.

Do not sever SC properly established under the former rules simply because the law changed. On the older primary-abuse secondary-effects basis, the source prohibits claimed increases after the cutoff, including adding a dependent. Cost-of-living increases requiring no claim may be paid. Verify the actual award basis before applying these limits to a payment action.

X.iv.1.D.1.i · DIC is a separate cause-of-death and filing inquiry

The article describes the restriction for later claims based on in-service death from alcohol-related disease/disability. Apply the actual filing history, prior SC findings and relevant exceptions with the governing DIC procedure. A compensation-development helper does not itself adjudicate survivor entitlement.

X.iv.1.D.1.j · A commonly alcohol-associated disease may have another cause

Do not deny a disease as alcohol-related unless the preponderance of evidence establishes that it is primarily due to alcohol abuse. Develop supported alternate causes and resolve reasonable doubt favorably. A general association, diagnosis list or notation that the claimant drinks is not enough.

X.iv.1.D.2.a · Purpose, frequency and immediate cause matter for drug misconduct

Drug use for its intoxicating effects that proximately and immediately causes disability/death can establish misconduct; progressive frequent nontherapeutic use causing addiction is also addressed. Isolated/infrequent use by itself, therapeutic use, and use/addiction resulting from an SC disability are not treated the same. Determine the actual circumstances.

X.iv.1.D.2.b · Do not classify ordinary prescribed treatment as abuse

The definition concerns illegal drugs, intentional nonmedical use of medication, and other intoxicating agents. Read the source’s prescription wording with 3.301(d), 2.a and X.iv.1.C.4.f: medically intended treatment and accidental/careless effects are not automatically abuse. Develop prescribing, purpose and actual use when unclear.

X.iv.1.D.2.c · Pre-November-1990 drug secondary effects have historical rules

For older claims, substantiated organic secondary effects of chronic drug use or infections coinciding with injection were not considered willful misconduct under the described rule. Determine the actual claim date and medical facts; do not apply the modern restriction retroactively without checking the governing law.

X.iv.1.D.2.d · Preserve proper older drug-related awards while checking new increases

The post-October-1990 restriction concerns primary drug abuse and its secondary consequences, read with the Allen exception in 2.e. Do not sever SC properly established under prior rules. The source restricts claimed increases on the older primary-abuse secondary-effects basis, including dependency additions, while allowing no-claim COLAs. Review the actual award basis before payment action.

X.iv.1.D.2.e · A secondary drug-use theory requires sufficient medical evidence

Medical evidence must establish drug abuse as secondary to or a symptom of an independently SC disability, with the stated misconduct distinction. Resulting disabilities may qualify under 3.310. The PTSD example depends on that medical relationship; having PTSD and using a substance does not alone establish causation.

X.iv.1.D.3.a · Check the tobacco restriction’s actual claim-date wording

The manual describes the June 1998 change, while 3.300(a) applies to claims received after June 9, 1998. Verify the exact receipt date, especially June 9 itself, rather than mechanically using the manual’s effective-date shorthand. The restriction concerns the in-service-tobacco basis; 3.300(b) preserves other specified bases.

X.iv.1.D.3.b · An old in-service-tobacco grant does not remove the later secondary restriction

For a new derivative secondary claim, review 3.300(c) and the actual filing date. The regulation uses received after June 9, 1998, while this manual block uses on-or-after wording. Do not decide the boundary date from that inconsistent shorthand. Separate a derivative claim from the independent post-service-use theory in 3.d–f.

X.iv.1.D.3.c · The nicotine-dependence example is a derivative theory

The example has nicotine dependence SC in 1997 and a new COPD claim in 2003 based on that same in-service-tobacco-related dependence. The later derivative claim is restricted under 3.300(c). It does not establish that every COPD claim, or every claim by someone with nicotine dependence, must be denied.

X.iv.1.D.3.d · Post-service tobacco use may present a different secondary chain

A disability related to tobacco use after service can have a secondary basis when the use is caused by an independently SC disability unrelated to tobacco. Apply VAOPGCPREC 6-2003 and the complete questions in 3.e. Identify the post-service timeline and actual SC condition rather than relying on a generic smoking association.

X.iv.1.D.3.e · Develop all three links in the post-service-tobacco theory

The evidence must address whether the SC disability caused post-service tobacco use; whether that use substantially caused/aggravated the claimed condition; and whether the additional disability would have been prevented but for the SC-caused use. Rating applies the supported answers. An opinion saying only smoking caused the disease leaves part of the theory unanswered.

X.iv.1.D.3.f · The PTSD example depends on the whole causal chain

In the example, PTSD symptoms cause smoking after service, that smoking substantially causes or aggravates emphysema, and the additional disability would not have occurred without the smoking. Each link needs support. Do not turn the example into a rule that PTSD plus a tobacco-related disease automatically warrants SC.

X.iv.1.E.1.a · Common accident is a defined fatal-incident category

This category involves two or more service members dying in the same noncombat accident/disaster. It excludes air and sea accidents. It does not mean every ordinary car crash or every incident with several injured people. Post-separation deaths use a separate referenced procedure.

X.iv.1.E.1.b · Jurisdiction is normally determined case by case

Establish jurisdiction for each common-accident case unless Central Office specifically assigns it. Preserve the actual assignment and follow claim-jurisdiction/transfer rules rather than assuming all related cases must automatically be worked by one RO.

X.iv.1.E.1.c · A clearly favorable case may remain with the RO

When LOD is clear, misconduct is not in question and a favorable determination is clearly warranted, the RO can adjudicate the case without routinely reviewing every related case or referring it to CO. This exception depends on the actual supported favorable circumstances.

X.iv.1.E.1.d · An unresolved or potentially adverse common-accident case goes to CO

If a favorable LOD/misconduct determination cannot be made from the evidence, the RO reassigns the eFolder and related cases in that office to CO (21C). CO obtains other related cases, makes the administrative determination, adds it to each related folder and returns the cases for the required award/denial action. The RO does not substitute its own adverse final common-accident determination.

X.v.1.E.1.a · Use a field examination for specific facts the ordinary process cannot resolve

A field examination can investigate employment or social adjustment, evidence of a condition before enlistment, dependent or marital status, ability to handle funds, or a material conflict in the record. These are examples, not a requirement to order one whenever the topic appears. IV.i.2.E.2.c explains when routine examination cannot resolve its listed questions; incident investigations also require the other efforts described in X.iv.1.C.5.d first.

Field evidence is different from a clinical examination or medical nexus opinion, and from appointing a fiduciary. Keep the actual underlying competency, dependency or service-connection evidence standard in view.

X.v.1.E.1.b · Make the 21-3537a request specific enough to investigate

Use VA Form 21-3537a, Field Examination Request. In FACTS TO BE ESTABLISHED, identify the purpose, service period and kind of claim. Summarize the material facts, the precise conflicting evidence, witness names and addresses, and known or probable evidence sources. General wording such as investigate the claim leaves the examiner without the needed factual question.

If entitlement depends on marriage, include the evidence for that marriage and relevant prior marriages of both parties. Say whether further evidence of validity or termination is needed. Put actual personal information in the authorized VA request; this tool records which preparation requirements were reviewed.

X.v.1.E.1.c · Define the requested history and provide the known leads

For medical, social or employment history of a Veteran or incapacitated child, state the period to cover. Include known treating physicians and treatment dates; identify physicians who already supplied statements and whether they should be contacted, and attach those statements. Include known employers and employment dates, plus the person’s addresses during the relevant period.

Provide as much as is known. Explain missing information and use available leads rather than inventing facts or treating every unknown address as a reason the request can never proceed.

X.v.1.E.1.d · Give the examiner enough information to identify the right person

Include the best available leads, full name, nicknames and other known names, relevant maiden and married surnames, and date of birth in FACTS TO BE ESTABLISHED. Similar names do not prove two records concern the same person. Retain the actual identifiers in the claim and authorized request.

X.v.1.E.1.e · File the request, send it to the proper hub and return the report

Add a copy of 21-3537a to the claims folder. Email the original to the fiduciary hub with jurisdiction over the primary beneficiary’s residence. Use the current C.1.d jurisdiction/contact information and its restricted-access protections when applicable. This instruction is not the 21-592/EP 290 appointment process.

When the completed report arrives, send it to the authorization or rating activity that requested the examination. Compare the report with the requested facts and identify remaining evidence needs under the underlying procedure. Sending the request does not mean the report was received, and receipt does not itself decide entitlement. This block prescribes no universal field-exam 30-, 60- or 65-day deadline.

X.v.1.E.1.f · Foreign field requests go through the responsible hub

Send a foreign field-examination request to the hub responsible for the foreign beneficiary’s residence. The hub forwards it to the appropriate embassy, consulate or Veterans Affairs Canada; the ordinary RO request does not bypass the hub and go directly to the foreign post.

Use C.1.d for jurisdiction and X.i.4.C for Philippine field-development requirements. X.i.4.C.3.b restricts routine service-fact investigations and evidence available through ordinary records channels; its manager/designee exceptions require the actual specified approval or finding. Conflicting Philippine dependency evidence has the prior clarification/contact requirement in X.i.4.C.5.c.

X.ii.6.C.1.a · Identify who needs certification and who must request it

Appointment or certification is appropriate when benefits are payable to a beneficiary finally rated incompetent by VA, under legal disability or a minor, including the specified child-custodian situation. Hospital, nursing-home or domiciliary care does not remove the need for a VA-rated incompetent beneficiary. A proposed finding or family complaint alone is not a final incompetency determination.

For a child in a natural/adoptive parent’s or stepparent’s custody, the source recognizes the parent for direct monthly benefits while withholding retroactive amounts pending fiduciary appointment under 38 U.S.C. 5502(a)(1) and E.4. This is not permission to release all retroactive funds to the custodian.

The hub requests appointment in most cases. ROs use 21-592 for court-determined incompetency, a grant to a minor, IDES, RACC and incompetent foreign beneficiaries. Verify the actual exception rather than making every VA incompetency case an RO referral. Certification is the signature on 21P-555; guardian includes the listed court-appointed fiduciary roles, but the title alone does not decide competency.

X.ii.6.C.1.b · Insurance proceeds have their own appointment requirement

For insurance proceeds, request certification when VA has found the beneficiary unable to manage benefits, a court has found inability to manage affairs, or the beneficiary is a minor. A minor entitled to insurance proceeds needs certification. Use X.ii.6.G for Insurance Center competency requests; compensation referral guidance does not adjudicate insurance entitlement.

X.ii.6.C.1.c · Upload the completed 21-592 and use the correct appointment control

Complete all applicable fields, upload the PDF to the beneficiary’s eFolder and establish EP 290—FID Fiduciary Adjustment for NWQ routing to the appropriate hub. Use street addresses where possible in Blocks 7, 9, 14A, 15A and 19. Sign Block 24 with the preparer’s LAN identification followed by for VSCM. A generic EP 290, ordinary 020 or 21-3537a field-evidence request is not a substitute.

Check the minor-beneficiary exception first: authorizing the award automatically establishes EP 590—Expedited Initial Appointment Field Examination. Only establish EP 290 for this purpose when that EP 590 was not automatically established. Do not duplicate the automatic control. Completing the referral does not certify a fiduciary or independently authorize payment.

X.ii.6.C.1.d · Use the correct residence and protect restricted cases

For an initial appointment, use the minor or incompetent beneficiary’s residence. Once a fiduciary is appointed, use the fiduciary’s residence for the hub activity. The separate X.v.1.E field-evidence request uses the primary beneficiary’s residence; do not interchange those rules.

The table assigns Florida/Georgia/the Carolinas to Columbia; the listed northeastern and Great Lakes states to Indianapolis; Kansas/Nebraska/the Dakotas/Oklahoma/Texas to Lincoln; the listed southeastern states, Washington DC and Puerto Rico to Louisville; the listed central states to Milwaukee; and the listed western states to Salt Lake City. Consult the full table for exact state coverage and current contacts. The Philippines and other foreign countries except the Caribbean, Mexico and Central/South America go to Indianapolis; those excepted foreign areas go to Lincoln. Puerto Rico is specifically Louisville.

For a RACC employee-Veteran or relative associated with the residence-based hub, the designated sister hub performs Fiduciary Program work. If a face-to-face field exam is required, the sister hub works with the original hub to obtain an impartial examiner. The sister pairs are Columbia/Louisville, Indianapolis/Salt Lake City and Lincoln/Milwaukee.

The table separates appointment-request PROMULGATION mailboxes from other FIDHUB inquiries. Use the actual action’s current instructions, including C.1.c’s EP/NWQ referral. Incoming fiduciary documents use the scanning vendor/CM processing or approved direct CM upload such as QuickSubmit; verify current addresses and do not improvise a recipient.

X.ii.6.C.1.e · Ask the receiving hub about an existing appointment request

After the 21-592 referral has been uploaded for hub review, direct status inquiries to that same hub. The hub is responsible for answering them. Check the actual referral and transfer history rather than creating a duplicate control or guessing a new office. This block does not prescribe a universal response/completion deadline.

X.ii.6.C.1.f · Temporary fiduciaries need the stated clear evidence and hub authority

A hub may appoint a temporary fiduciary while competency is being determined or under decision review or legacy appeal. This requires clear evidence that the beneficiary’s VA funds are being misused, or that the beneficiary is unable or unwilling to use them for urgent needs. An unsupported family disagreement does not establish those facts or incompetency.

The hub’s authorization activity processes these requests, subject to the RO exceptions in FPM Part I, 5.B. Identify and refer the actual evidence for that procedure. Temporary appointment, an expedited permanent appointment, a competency determination and payment withholding are distinct actions; one does not automatically authorize the others.

X.ii.6.C.1.g · Keep a pending appointment request within VA

Do not notify anyone outside VA of a pending fiduciary-appointment request. The purpose is to avoid unnecessary or unsuitable outside guardian appointments. This restriction concerns the pending appointment request; it does not eliminate required notices in the separate competency or benefit decision procedure.

X.ii.6.C.1.h · Route incoming fiduciary documents according to the actual case status

Refer incoming fiduciary-related documents and correspondence to the fiduciary scanning vendor when the beneficiary is rated incompetent or a proposed incompetency determination is pending with a hub. Follow the linked centralized-mail instructions, including the approved direct-upload option in C.1.d. A new unsupported third-party competency complaint uses A.1.f and should not be classified solely because it mentions family finances.

X.ii.6.C.2.a · A pending competency or appointment action does not routinely stop direct payments

Do not routinely suspend existing direct payments while competency is developed or a fiduciary is certified. If evidence shows the beneficiary is not receiving or is being deprived of the full benefits paid, the source permits consideration of withholding and expedited hub appointment. Establish the facts and actual authorized action; an allegation or pending request is not itself a suspension instruction.

For established entitlement with no payment yet made, or an increase that is payable, consider whether delaying payment would create undue hardship. Apply the actual beneficiary, monthly/retroactive, certification and award rules in D/E. Hardship consideration does not by itself override a specific requirement to withhold retroactive amounts.

X.ii.6.C.2.b · Use the suspension entries only after the payment basis is authorized

For an applicable suspension pending appointment or change of a fiduciary, select Other in DECISION on the VBMS-Awards BASIC ELIGIBILITY tab. Use the source’s remark: Beneficiary incompetent - appointment of fiduciary pending. Review the current VBMS Awards User Guide. These are system instructions after the basis for the action is established, not independent permission to suspend every pending competency case.

X.ii.6.C.2.c · Resumption depends on the actual suspension and adjustment period

When resuming the described routine-processing suspension pending appointment or change of a fiduciary, select Eligible Beneficiary in DECISION on BASIC ELIGIBILITY. Do not enter prior net award data unless the amendment affects an adjustment before Share’s LAST PAID DATE. Review the actual amended award and system instructions if that earlier period is affected.

This does not automatically govern an unrelated termination or supervised-direct-pay restart. Confirm the required hub approval, certification and authorized payment basis under the applicable D/E procedure before changing the award.

X.ii.6.C.3.a · The hub sends certification copies needed by the Insurance Center

Hubs forward completed 21P-555 copies to the Philadelphia Insurance Center so it can update insurance records. This does not make the compensation processor the insurance decisionmaker or replace the benefit-specific insurance process.

X.ii.6.C.3.b · Insurance-initiated competency requests use the dedicated insurance article

Follow X.ii.6.G when the Philadelphia Insurance Center initiates a competency determination request. Establish the requesting activity and benefit before applying the ordinary compensation workflow; the field-report routing rule is not a substitute for insurance-specific coordination.

X.ii.6.D.1.a · Tell the examination provider about the established incompetency and fiduciary

When scheduling an examination for a Veteran VA has found incompetent, put that determination and the fiduciary’s name/address in the examination request COMMENTS. Follow IV.i.2.A.9–10 for the actual request; a proposed finding is not a final determination.

X.ii.6.D.1.b · A missed routine future examination requires three coordinated contacts

Before reducing or suspending benefits for an incompetent Veteran’s missed routine future examination, send the Veteran the proposed-adverse-action notice. Send the fiduciary a letter explaining the missed examination, why it was necessary, that willingness to attend allows rescheduling, and the possible reduction/discontinuance. Also email the hub explaining the missed examination and requesting help to establish willingness to report. Apply IV.ii.2.B.1 to the underlying missed-examination action; the missed appointment alone does not authorize immediate suspension.

X.ii.6.D.1.c · Institutional care uses the separate institutional-award article

For admission to a VA or non-VA institution for medical care, use X.ii.6.F. Establish the actual benefit and institutional circumstances before adjusting payment; this cross-reference does not supply a universal reduction rule.

X.ii.6.D.1.d · A person found incompetent can still pursue a benefits claim

Process a claim submitted by a person VA has found incompetent, even when a fiduciary is appointed. The 3.353 finding concerns ability to manage affairs and money; it does not bar the person from prosecuting a claim. Do not reject the application solely because the beneficiary signed or submitted it.

X.ii.6.D.2.a · Identify whether VA, a court or both made the finding

Competency findings may arise from a VA rating, a court decree, or both. Their processing routes differ. VA does not have to recognize a court-appointed fiduciary as the person entitled to receive VA payments; hub payee certification remains a separate question.

X.ii.6.D.2.b · Develop medical evidence and complete the nonjudicial proposal controls

For medical evidence suggesting incompetency without a judicial finding, establish the appropriate rating EP if none is pending. Obtain additional evidence if the record is inadequate, then refer it to rating. If rating finds the beneficiary still competent, annotate the evidence, clear the EP only if no other rating issues remain and stop this proposal sequence. Use the eFolder SUBJECT field/document instructions for the annotation.

If rating proposes incompetency, promulgate the rating EP and send the proposed-incompetency letter, then authorize the EP. Verify automatic EP 590 Due Process for Incompetency; establish it manually if absent. NWQ transfers it to the hub the following day. Authorization creates/finalizes the proposed letter under EP 590 if applicable, adds the proper due-process tracked item regardless of letter type, and associates the notice/letter with the folder. Preserve the original award or increase under D.2.c while competency is unresolved; new evidence and hearing requests use D.3.c/e.

X.ii.6.D.2.c · Pay the appropriate current benefits while protecting retroactive amounts

If an original award or reinstatement becomes payable during the unresolved nonjudicial competency process, generate the award without waiting, withholding benefits until the first day of the current month. For an increase, process the adjustment without waiting, withholding the increase until the actual LAST PAID DATE. Check payment-method cutoff dates before promulgation to avoid accidentally releasing retroactive money.

In all cases, withhold retroactive benefits until the final competency decision. A final competent finding releases the benefits withheld for that review; a final incompetent finding keeps retroactive benefits withheld until the hub assigns a fiduciary. A rare, supported best-interest exception can justify delaying current benefits too—for example, documented immediate dissipation of all income. Review that actual evidence and authority; a generic family disagreement or a hardship assertion does not erase the retroactive rules.

X.ii.6.D.2.d · Process the hub recommendation and distinguish SDP from restored competency

The hub’s authorization activity ordinarily processes its own payment recommendation; an RO processes one referred because the hub cannot. If the hub concurs with incompetency and certifies a fiduciary on 21P-555, release withheld benefits to that fiduciary as instructed and apply E.2.b. If the RO also adjusts the award, give the hub the award copy and notify the fiduciary of the adjustment and review rights. This block does not require a separate fiduciary notice solely for releasing withheld benefits.

If the hub finds the person able to manage funds and certifies SDP, authorize the arrangement and send its finding plus all supporting evidence to rating for reassessment. A competent rating requires release of competency-related withheld benefits to the beneficiary, an award copy to the hub, and notice of the determination/review rights. A continued-incompetency rating means continue SDP and notify the hub. Process any necessary adjustment under the pending EP 290; clear it if no adjustment is required. SDP certification itself is not a rating that restores competency.

X.ii.6.D.2.e · A court-appointed fiduciary alone does not establish incompetency evidence

Do not send a case for incompetency rating solely because a court appointed a fiduciary. There must also be a judicial incompetency determination or medical evidence. The fiduciary’s title by itself is insufficient.

X.ii.6.D.2.f · A judicial incompetency finding uses a final-decision route

A court decree or fiduciary appointment specifically by reason of incompetency does not require a proposed incompetency rating or a proposed-adverse-action notice for the competency issue. Follow D.2.g for the actual final rating and payment steps. This does not waive notice requirements for unrelated benefit changes.

X.ii.6.D.2.g · Develop the court finding, obtain the final rating and control the hub referral

Judicial findings do not bind rating. If the beneficiary was hospitalized for treatment or observation, request records useful for evaluating competency. Rating completes a final determination. If competent, complete pending award actions, send the decision notice and clear the rating EP. If incompetent, complete the pending award actions while withholding retroactive benefits until fiduciary assignment, issue contemporaneous notice, clear the rating EP, associate the judicial documents, and establish EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment for NWQ routing.

Notify the hub with 21-592 if not already supplied, or a memorandum/letter if it was. Continue existing payments and apportionments pending certification or other hub instructions. On certification, the hub authorization activity processes the 21P-555 payee and forwards a copy to Insurance Service. Child-incapacity and multiple-custodian circumstances retain their cited separate requirements.

X.ii.6.D.2.h · Child self-support and financial competency are separate findings

Refer evidence to rating to determine whether the child became incapable of self-support before age 18, remains permanently incapable, and cannot manage financial affairs. These are distinct questions: a child may be unable to support themself but competent to manage money. Apply the child-specific B.1–2/A.2.c procedures and resulting certification rules.

X.ii.6.D.2.i · A restored court finding does not always permit immediate direct payment

If only a court previously held the beneficiary incompetent, begin direct payment after the hub certifies the restoration proceedings were proper. Explain the restoration in award REMARKS and email the award copy to the supervising hub. If both a court and VA previously found incompetency, develop the court decree and accompanying evidence, refer them to rating, and obtain hub approval before initiating direct payment.

A new rating is required after a prior VA finding; a continued-incompetency decision must note the court declaration. For a child incapable of self-support because of mental defect, rating must also reconsider continued entitlement, but do not defer the award action merely for that referral. Institutional awards still use F.1.

X.ii.6.D.3.a · The proposal notice explains the evidence, payment effect and response rights

Include the proposed rating or a short summary of supporting facts/evidence, explain the payment effect, and explain rights to submit evidence, request a personal hearing and have representation. Allow 60 days to respond. Do not put Federal tax information in the notice. A hearing requested at any time before the final competency decision must occur before that decision; do not confuse the 60-day evidence period with a cutoff that permits ignoring a later predecision hearing request.

X.ii.6.D.3.b · For the specified minor, send the proposal to the recognized current payee

When VA pays a minor’s custodian and a competency decision is needed at majority, send the proposed-incompetency notice to the current hub-certified fiduciary or custodian recognized as a parent under 5502(a). Use E.3.c and applicable law to establish the actual age of majority rather than assuming it is always 18.

X.ii.6.D.3.c · The hub ordinarily reviews evidence received during the proposal period

The hub reviews competency evidence received within 60 days of the proposal notice and completes the final rating, subject to the RO exceptions in FPM I.1.A.2.b. Evidence connected with a requested hearing follows D.3.e instead.

X.ii.6.D.3.d · Explain what a requested hearing provides and what VA cannot pay

Tell the beneficiary they may bring witnesses whose testimony becomes part of the record and may use an accredited service-organization representative without charge or a properly appointed/recognized attorney. VA provides the room, officials and transcript or summary, but cannot pay other hearing expenses. Help with the appropriate representation form if representation is desired but not designated; use the hearing and representative-recognition articles for execution.

X.ii.6.D.3.e · Honor the hearing request and follow the correct hub or RO jurisdiction

The hub processes a hearing requested between the proposal notice and final decision unless an FPM responsibility exception applies. For an RO exception, establish the hearing control, schedule/hold the hearing and obtain rating’s final competency decision. If competent, promulgate, complete award actions, notify and associate documentation. If incompetent, do those actions, complete/upload 21-592 and establish EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment for the hub. The hub appoints the fiduciary and releases appropriate retroactive benefits. Use the separate hearing article and preserve review/appeal rights.

X.ii.6.D.3.f · Allow appropriate assistance during the competency hearing

Designated hearing officials follow X.v.1.D.4. Because this concerns competency, allow flexibility for next of kin or another person chosen by the beneficiary to participate on the beneficiary’s behalf or help the beneficiary. This explanation does not replace the complete hearing procedure.

X.ii.6.D.3.g · A due-process waiver needs documentation and notice to the hub

Associate the waiver with the folder, close the due-process tracked item and email the hub using the prescribed subject Due Process Waived- Incompetency Proposal. Include the beneficiary’s name, claim number and date VA received the waiver in the authorized email. Telephone or written waivers from the beneficiary or authorized representative may be accepted. The hub keeps jurisdiction of EP 590; the waiver does not itself transfer it back or decide competency.

X.ii.6.D.3.h · No response follows the 65-day hub control

If there is no response within 65 days of the proposal notice, the hub makes the final competency decision from the record. Do not substitute 60 days for this no-response control or treat expiration as an automatic finding of incompetency. Check actual evidence and any predecision hearing request.

X.ii.6.D.3.i · Separate legacy competency appeals from disputes over fiduciary selection

The RO of jurisdiction handles legacy appeals of incompetency determinations: prepare the SOC, attach Form 9 and send it to the beneficiary or applicable fiduciary and the representative. Excluding information as harmful to the beneficiary’s state of mind requires a physician’s opinion and advice about communicating it. Hubs handle legacy appeals, supplemental claims and higher-level reviews about selection of a fiduciary. Use M21-5 for the actual legacy appeal; this is not a general rule to process modern decision reviews as legacy NODs.

X.ii.6.D.4.a · Only the hub authorizes supervised direct payment

The hub may authorize SDP for Veterans rated incompetent or other qualifying adult beneficiaries when direct payment fits the person’s capacity and reasonably protects their interests. It records authorization on 21P-555. Under 13.110, limited supervision and reassessment belong to the hub; a processor cannot establish SDP by independently judging mental capacity.

X.ii.6.D.4.b · Old SDP approval does not automatically resume after lost entitlement

If entitlement to benefits paid through SDP was lost and later restored, obtain hub concurrence before resuming direct payment. When necessary, prepare 21-592 for a current 21P-555, upload the form and email the hub that action is pending. Verify the existing withholding period; a later form is not an automatic reset of an existing retroactive-withholding clock.

X.ii.6.D.4.c · Record the SDP certification and the Veteran’s Share status

The hub annotates the award with the 21P-555 date and supervised direct payment notation. For a Veteran it updates PRINCIPLE GUARDIANSHIP FOLDER LOC and selects SUPERVISED DIRECT PAY on Share’s 601 CHANGE OF FIDUCIARY screen. Use the actual system instructions and furnish required award documentation.

X.ii.6.D.4.d · Pay the full monthly rate and separately control withheld retroactive benefits

Prepare the SDP award at the full entitled monthly rate; a lower monthly rate under this arrangement is prohibited. Withhold all retroactive benefits. For an apportioned beneficiary, apply Step 1’s specified difference as withholding on the primary beneficiary’s award using OTHER ADJUSTMENTS. Establish a diary six calendar months after SDP certification. At the end of six months, request the hub’s certification to release withheld benefits to the beneficiary or a fiduciary.

If the hub certifies an extension, compare it to the original one-year retroactive-withholding limit. An extension beyond that limit permits withholding only until the one-year limit expires, then release. For an extension within the limit, set a diary 30 days before the extension ends; after it ends request release certification again and repeat the response/extension review. A missing response is not an established extension or permission to guess the recipient; coordinate promptly, especially at the limit.

These are the manual’s controls for withheld retroactive money. The hub’s separate 13.110 supervision can include a 12-month reassessment and a further limited supervision period; that does not change D.4.d’s one-year retroactive-withholding limit. Check the actual payee/release instructions and independently applicable award safeguards.

X.ii.6.D.5.a · Implement the competent rating and route the payment update to the hub

Promulgate the rating restoring competency, notify the beneficiary and establish EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment for NWQ routing. The hub uses CHANGE OF FIDUCIARY in Share to ensure future payments go directly to the beneficiary. Reconcile required withheld-benefit actions separately; recording the rating does not itself perform the payment-system change.

X.ii.6.E.1.a · Reconfirm a certification only when both stale-payment conditions apply

Do not process an award on an appointment/certification more than one year old when that fiduciary also has received no payment for one year. Both conditions matter. Obtain a new 21P-555 or other hub notice confirming the appointment/certification remains in effect. If no 21P-555 is of record, request one by sending 21P-592 to the hub.

X.ii.6.E.1.b · The hub chooses between competing custodial parents

If more than one natural or adoptive parent appears to be a minor’s custodian, refer the facts to the hub; it advises which parent to pay. Request a current 21P-555 with 21P-592 if needed. Minority here means below the applicable age of majority, not automatically below 18.

X.ii.6.E.1.c · Use the certified names only after resolving identity

Compare names on the application, custody documents and 21P-555. If names differ but identity is certain, use the certification’s names for the award. If identity is in question, email the hub for clarification. A spelling difference and a possible different person need different handling.

X.ii.6.E.1.d · Distinguish beneficiary name changes, minor corrections and fiduciary identity changes

A beneficiary’s name change while a VA-appointed fiduciary/custodian is paid may be entered without prior hub approval; upload the supporting documents. A minor fiduciary/custodian name correction with no identity change can be made on a statement, without further evidence or prior hub approval; upload documentation.

For a fiduciary name/identity change after appointment—including marriage, remarriage or divorce—email the hub, upload all relevant correspondence including the email and do not make the change unless the hub requests it. Do not treat this as the minor-correction exception.

X.ii.6.E.1.e · Notify the hub of changes affecting appointment, custody or suitability

For relevant information received outside Centralized Mail, email the hub all material facts and upload correspondence about a pending appointment. If the fiduciary lost constructive custody or suitability/fitness is at issue, upload the email, state if payments have actually been suspended, establish EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment and add a permanent note explaining it. The label permits NWQ routing. Reporting that a suspension occurred is not authority to suspend merely because a concern arrived.

X.ii.6.E.1.f · For $10,000 through $25,000, authorize and then complete the hub accounting referral

Promulgate and authorize the award, send the decision notice to the custodian/guardian, and upload both notice and award. Complete/upload the E.1.i memorandum so the hub can review accounting requirements, then establish EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment. Exactly $10,000 and $25,000 belong to this band; the over-$25,000 prior-authorization hold is a different procedure. Existing certification and other applicable release requirements still apply.

X.ii.6.E.1.g · Over $25,000 stays pending authorization until hub clearance

For a proposed retroactive award above $25,000 under fiduciary supervision, upload the protection/accounting review memorandum, establish EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment and email the hub requesting an expedited response. Keep the proposed award in pending authorization. Do not authorize until the hub completes the memorandum’s bottom portion, uploads it and emails that necessary protections and accounting are in place.

X.ii.6.E.1.h · Check concurrence, protection and the third signature before authorization

If the hub concurs and confirms protections/accounting, verify its signed memorandum is in the eFolder and authorize. If it does not concur because estate protection must be established or increased, return the award and postpone promulgation/authorization until the hub confirms requirements are met. Awards over $25,000 also require a third concurrence from the VSCM or a designee no lower than a coach. The source points to E.1.i in this block, while the over-$25,000 template is E.1.j; use the template matching the actual amount and do not substitute the lower-band post-release memorandum.

X.ii.6.E.1.i · Complete the memorandum for a release of $10,000–$25,000

The original template appears in this reference preview, including offline. Fill in the hub recipient, sender, date, beneficiary and claims-folder identifiers, and actual retroactive amount. It states that award action has been taken and asks the hub to review accounting requirements. Put real claim identifiers only in the authorized claim document. This is the post-authorization E.1.f memorandum.

X.ii.6.E.1.j · Use the pending-award concurrence memorandum for more than $25,000

The original image template is embedded in the preview. Identify the beneficiary/folder, actual proposed retroactive amount and period, and recommendation addressing suitability of the payment arrangement. The sample’s $28,000 and dates are examples, not case defaults. The hub completes concurrence or nonconcurrence, required-protection findings, signature and date. Obtain that completed record and the confirming email before authorization under E.1.g–h.

X.ii.6.E.2.a · A court-appointed guardian still needs VA hub payee certification

Do not pay the court-appointed guardian until the hub supplies 21P-555. When court documents arrive from another source, review the folder and corporate record for an existing VA fiduciary and upload the court documents. If one exists, establish EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment and a permanent note asking the hub to review recognition or a successor. If none exists, also complete/upload 21P-592 and state the referral reason in the permanent note. NWQ routes the correctly labeled EP.

X.ii.6.E.2.b · Build the award from the hub’s certified payee information

Use the certification’s fiduciary-payee name/address, legend such as custodian of or guardian of, and beneficiary name. Annotate the award Fiduciary-payee certified by hub. Give the certifying hub documentation of any resulting award, including SDP. Hubs generally authorize these awards; ROs handle specified circumstances such as IDES, RACC and foreign residents or an actual referred recommendation.

X.ii.6.E.2.c · Recognized custodians and institutional awards have additional rules

Use E.4 for a custodian recognized under 5502, and X.ii.6.F for an institutionalized Veteran. Ordinary certified-payee instructions do not replace those payment and withholding requirements.

X.ii.6.E.3.a · Use the applicable majority law and child-payment authority

State law on majority, 38 U.S.C. 5502 and 38 CFR 13.100(a)(3) govern minority status and direct payment to children. Majority and the compensation school-age rules answer different questions. Confirm the applicable jurisdiction and any statutory change.

X.ii.6.E.3.b · Ordinary minority-only fiduciary awards need a three-month advance diary

When the only reason for the fiduciary is minority, establish DIARY CODE 20, Helpless Child Reaches Majority, three months before majority, including recognized custodians. On expiration, obtain the child’s current address, prepare the direct-payment award under 5502, establish EP 400 FID-Correspondence and manually broker it to the hub, then email the hub about the action. EP 400 is required when the diary expires regardless of payment status. The diary code’s name does not establish a separate finding of incapacity.

X.ii.6.E.3.c · Consult the full majority-age table and check actual law

The captured table lists Alabama and Nebraska at 19; Mississippi and Puerto Rico at 21; and the other listed states/territories at 18, including DC, Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, Philippine Republic and Trust Territory. E.3.f–g recognizes statutory changes: the historical table is a starting point, not a substitute for confirming the governing law when a change or jurisdiction question exists. This tool does not automatically calculate minority termination from an assumed universal age.

X.ii.6.E.3.d · Mental-incapacity minority awards have a six-month advance referral

For a minor whom rating finds incapable of self-support due to mental incompetency, make the award open-ended and set a diary six months before majority. At expiration, complete/submit 21P-592 to the hub, detailing mental status and any information about a parent’s suitability. Do not use the ordinary minority-only three-month direct-payment sequence as if competency were established.

X.ii.6.E.3.e · School attendance after 18 uses its own majority transition

For a child over 18 attending school whose fiduciary or parental custodian is paid only because of minority, set a diary 60 days before majority. At expiration, confirm the child remains unmarried and in school, take direct-payment action and email the hub. Direct payment is effective the later of the first day of the month of majority or the actual LAST PAID DATE. Keep continued school entitlement separate from the payee change.

X.ii.6.E.3.f · A statutory reduction in majority age can require direct payment

When payments go through a fiduciary solely because of minority and the child or custodian requests direct payment under a statutory age change, authorize the appropriate direct-payment change. Hubs routinely identify affected beneficiaries. Verify the actual law and request; do not assume every change in school status is a statutory change in majority.

X.ii.6.E.3.g · Apply the statutory-change date and court-fiduciary exception

Change the payee’s name/address and make direct payment effective the actual LAST PAID DATE when applying the statutory majority change. If payment is through a court-appointed fiduciary, refer the request to the hub before any change. The standard entry is not authority to bypass that exception.

X.ii.6.E.3.h · An award at or after majority can include the child’s earlier retroactive benefits

Under 3.403(a)(2), include retroactive amounts owed to the child when awarding on or after majority, even if they cover a period when the child was a minor. Establish that the award is payable to this child and apply any separate legal-disability/certification requirement; the prior period’s minority alone does not remove the retroactive entitlement.

X.ii.6.E.4.a · Recognize a parental custodian only when the listed conditions are met

The custodian must be the natural or adoptive parent or stepparent, have actual or constructive custody, and have no record indicating unfitness. Apply E.4.b for an apportionment or E.4.c for benefits in the child’s own right. Check E.4.d–e withholding exceptions first; parental status alone is not enough.

X.ii.6.E.4.b · For an eligible parental-custodian apportionment, pay current funds and control the retroactive hold

Validate EP 130 with the parent as custodian, the child’s payee code and the correct Apportionment or PMC-Apportionment label. Under EP 600/130, withhold retroactive apportionment on the Veteran’s or surviving spouse’s award. In OTHER ADJUSTMENTS use Pending Apportionment Decision, the monthly amount, the apportionment beginning date, and LAST PAID DATE as the end. In ALLOTMENTS use the recipient, Apportionment Granted, monthly amount and LAST PAID DATE as award effective date. Generate the award; this releases future funds while holding retroactive amounts.

Add the Custodian recognized under 38 U.S.C. 5502 print remark. If 21P-592 was already submitted, upload a memo/letter alerting the hub to the award; otherwise complete/upload the form. Authorize EP 130 and continue it at authorization with a Pending Appointment of Fiduciary tracked item: initial 30-day suspense, then 15-day extensions while appointment is pending. Authorize EP 600 and notify both the custodian and Veteran/surviving spouse.

Retain an automatically established EP 590 Expedited Initial Appointment Field Examination; if absent establish EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment. Do not cancel/change that EP or label yourself; email the hub if it was established in error. Add a permanent note that the hub must update Share CHANGE OF FIDUCIARY before retroactive release. The hub reviews appointment, cancels the EP 290 award and establishes EP 590 as specified.

NWQ may return EP 130 when the tracked item closes/expires, but return alone is not proof of appointment. After actual appointment and required hub update, the RO removes only the applicable apportionment withholding, updates ALLOTMENTS to the certified recipient, granted amount and original grant effective date, then generates/authorizes the release.

X.ii.6.E.4.c · For the child’s own benefit, recognize the parent but withhold retroactive money

Generate the award with the parent as custodian, the child’s payee code and the correct claim label; withhold all retroactive benefits. Add the 5502 custodian print remark. If 21P-592 was already sent, upload an award-action memo/letter; otherwise complete/upload the form. Authorize and send the custodian the decision notice.

Retain automatic EP 590 or establish EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment if no automatic EP appeared. Do not cancel/change the EP 290 or its label; ask the hub about an error. Add the permanent note requiring Share CHANGE OF FIDUCIARY update before retroactive release. Here the hub appoints, authorizes EP 290 and releases withheld retroactive benefits. Do not import E.4.b’s RO EP 130 release or its 30/15-day apportionment suspense into every own-right award.

X.ii.6.E.4.d · The excluded apportionment situations require withholding current and retroactive funds

Do not release under the parental-custodian exception if the child is not in natural/adoptive parent or stepparent custody, court guardianship/fiduciary appointment is pending, the minor is in custody of a bonded reservation officer, or the beneficiary is an adult child incapable of self-support by reason of incompetency. For an otherwise payable apportionment, validate the child payee code and EP 130 label. Under EP 600/130 enter OTHER ADJUSTMENTS: Other Withholding Reason, the monthly amount, grant effective date, and a blank end date for continuous withholding. Make no ALLOTMENTS entry.

The RO establishes EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment and completes/uploads 21P-592 if not already submitted. Do not attempt to establish hub-only EP 590 or cancel/change the EP 290/label; ask the hub to correct errors. Authorize EP 130 and continue at authorization with Pending Appointment of Fiduciary for 30 days then 15-day extensions; authorize EP 600. Notify the filing custodian and Veteran/surviving spouse, and add the permanent note requiring the hub’s Share update before funds release.

The hub handles appointment and its EP 290-to-590 control. After actual appointment, NWQ returns EP 130 to the RO for release: delete the applicable withholding and enter the recipient, Apportionment Granted, monthly grant amount and grant effective date in ALLOTMENTS. Expiration of the suspense alone does not satisfy appointment or authorize payment.

X.ii.6.E.4.e · The same excluded situations also block current payment of the child’s own benefit

For a child’s own-right award in one of E.4.d’s listed excluded situations, generate an award withholding all retroactive and future funds. Complete/upload 21P-592 if needed. Validate the minor child’s name, payee code and correct label; authorize and notify the custodian who filed. Retain automatic EP 590 or establish EP 290 FID Fiduciary Adjustment if absent. Add the permanent note requiring the hub’s CHANGE OF FIDUCIARY update before release. The hub appoints and authorizes EP 290. These steps are not the apportionment OTHER ADJUSTMENTS/ALLOTMENTS workflow.

X.ii.6.E.4.f · Pay the person the hub certifies after a recognized-custodian award

If the recognized custodian is unsuitable, the hub may recommend suspension to conserve funds while appointing a suitable fiduciary. After it certifies the same or a different person, pay the certified person. If the only action is changing/removing the fiduciary, no proposed-adverse-action notice is required for that change; do not extend that exception to a separate reduction in entitlement.

X.ii.6.E.4.g · Loss of custody requires an updated appointment referral

When the recognized custodian no longer has custody, submit 21P-592 to the hub. Describe the actual custody status and any information about parental suitability. Loss of custody needs a factual referral, not an assumed automatic choice of a replacement payee.

X.ii.6.E.5.a · A reservation officer payee still requires hub certification

An eligible award for a Native American beneficiary may be paid to the recognized superintendent or bonded reservation officer under 13.100. Send 21P-592 for hub payee certification before processing. Use the applicable minor/adult appointment procedure and do not confuse this with the ordinary parental-custodian exception.

X.ii.6.E.5.b · Use the specified Bureau of Indian Affairs payee legend

For this 13.100 reservation-officer award, do not enter the superintendent’s or officer’s personal name as payee. Use Bureau of Indian Affairs, followed by the agency/RO name, for the named beneficiary, as prescribed by the source and certification.

X.ii.6.F.1.a · Send admission or transfer information to the hub

Forward notice of an incompetent Veteran’s admission or transfer to the fiduciary hub of jurisdiction. The RO remains responsible for any resulting award adjustment. Apply the actual care and benefit rules; admission itself does not establish a universal reduction.

X.ii.6.F.1.b · Obtain reports when incompetency is determined after admission

If VA rates the Veteran incompetent after institutional admission, request the information, reports or summaries needed because of that finding. Use CAPRI for VAMC requests.

X.ii.6.F.2.a · Identify the authority for VA-funded nursing home care

Section 1720 can fund public or private nursing care following qualifying Armed Forces hospital care and discharge, following VA hospital care, or on direct admission for a service-connected disability. Verify the actual placement and funding rather than inferring VA expense from the facility name.

X.ii.6.F.2.b · Apply the benefit-specific reduction rule

Pension care adjustments use 3.551. Additional aid-and-attendance benefits use 3.552 and X.iii.1.C; disability compensation A&A is subject to the government-expense hospitalization rule in 3.552(b)(2). Check its exceptions and actual care classification before changing the award.

X.ii.6.F.2.c · Get a rating and send the correct nursing-home referral

Send a VAMC hospital summary indicating changed competency to rating to decide competency and possible A&A or housebound entitlement. If incompetency continues and no fiduciary exists, send the hub over the VAMC a 21-592 if none was sent, recording placement, transfer date, possible release in six months and next-of-kin details, with the summary. If a fiduciary exists, send that hub the summary.

The original competent branch contains a duplicated no-fiduciary condition and cites D.6.a, which is absent from the current D article. Current VA-rated restoration is D.5.a; court-only restoration is D.2.i. Use the actual findings and current restoration procedure instead of treating this defective cross-reference as automatic payment authority.

X.ii.6.F.2.d · Coordinate release or termination of VA-funded care

The transferring VAMC controls the nursing placement and reports release or termination of VA expense. Make the required benefit adjustment, send the notice to the geographical hub and continue an existing Director-payee award if no replacement fiduciary has been appointed. This continuity instruction does not authorize a new institutional award.

X.ii.6.F.3.a · Check current eligibility before using older apportionment language

This block describes an otherwise proper apportionment before fiduciary appointment and requires an award copy and expedited-appointment request to the hub. It must be read with current VI.iv.2.A: new need-based apportionments ended February 9, 2026. A noninstitutionalized incompetent status alone no longer supplies new eligibility. A.3.c also protects a minor apportionee’s funds when the primary beneficiary is incompetent.

X.ii.6.F.3.b · Verify the currently apportionable balance

The original block describes the full monthly rate less the reduced institutional rate. Current VI.iv.2.A.4.a controls current apportionments and includes a compensation-specific rule for an incompetent Veteran without a fiduciary. Establish the actual payable balance and A&A adjustment; do not deduct an assumed institutional amount.

X.ii.6.F.3.c · Confirm every institutional eligibility condition

For a current compensation claim, verify incompetency, absence of a fiduciary and government-provided hospital, domiciliary or nursing-home care. Current VI.iv.2.A.1.d lists eligible compensation dependents, including dependent parents; use that current provision with 3.452 rather than silently excluding a listed dependent because this older block mentions only spouse and children.

X.ii.6.F.3.d · Estranged-spouse pension awards have their own calculation

For the described estranged married pension Veteran paid at the no-dependent rate, apply 3.551 when institutionalized at VA expense. If the spouse meets the stated apportionment criteria, use the difference between the institutional rate and the Veteran-with-spouse rate. IX.iii.1.F.2.o governs cases where counting the spouse’s income would reduce pension. This is not a compensation formula.

X.ii.6.F.4.a · Distinguish the two patient-fund accounts

Personal Funds of Patients (PFOP) accounts can be maintained by a VAMC Director or by Hines ITC. The historical FDIB transfers created these separate arrangements. Hines holds accounts associated with non-VA institutional confinement or unknown whereabouts; identify the actual account before making an award transaction.

X.ii.6.F.4.b · A Director award and a Hines allotment are different

An award to a VAMC Director pays the entire payable amount without a PFOP allotment; the Director deposits money not currently needed. A Hines PFOP deposit requires an award adjustment allotting a definite sum and is made only for a Veteran in a non-VA institution.

X.ii.6.F.4.c · Obtain the correct authority to use patient funds

A VAMC Director may use that facility’s PFOP money for the Veteran’s comforts and needs. A non-VA institution needs a hub memorandum authorizing partial or full release. Follow F.6.g for the award action; processing notifies Hines Accounting, and the hub authorizes release or transfer when Accounting requests it.

X.ii.6.F.4.d · Death changes the patient-funds procedure

PFOP funds payable after the Veteran’s death use the accrued-benefits procedures in XI.ii.3.E.6–9. Do not release them under the living-beneficiary care or discharge branch.

X.ii.6.F.5.a · Non-bed care is a trial absence

A temporary hospital release tests whether the Veteran can adjust outside the hospital and should be discharged or return. A non-VA institutional furlough means the same thing here. It is not automatically a final discharge.

X.ii.6.F.5.b · Forward qualifying absence reports to the appropriate hub

For departure on or return from non-bed care lasting 30 days or more, forward the VAMC report to the hub over the existing fiduciary, or, if no fiduciary exists, the hub over the VAMC area. This rule is more specific than a generic beneficiary-residence routing rule.

X.ii.6.F.5.c · Preserve direct payments pending appointment

Continue payments during non-bed care. Section 13.30(b)(1) protects direct monthly payments until VA appoints a fiduciary. Separate valid withholding or benefit adjustments still require their own authority.

X.ii.6.F.5.d · Match the payment arrangement before adjusting an absence

For a qualifying non-bed release or authorized absence of at least 30 days, ordinarily pay the full last-rated amount from departure and discontinue a PFOP allotment with prior hub approval when required. If the entire award goes to a VAMC Director or is apportioned between institution and dependents, take no action solely for the absence; reconsider apportionment when relevant facts changed. If entitlement ended but additional funds are needed, use the PFOP release procedure.

X.ii.6.F.5.e · An extension alone does not create another adjustment

Do not make another apportionment or award adjustment merely because the original absence was extended. The institution’s chief officer reviews safeguarding needs and whether existing payments remain justified, and recommends action if special facts warrant it.

X.ii.6.F.6.a · New institutional awards ended in 2018

An institutional award was a hub award to a VAMC Director or a non-VA institution’s chief officer for an incompetent Veteran in care. Hubs stopped establishing these awards on August 13, 2018. The remaining instructions can govern existing awards; they are not permission to establish a new one today.

X.ii.6.F.6.b · Prevent a payment interruption at final discharge

Coordinate the institution and RO closely so final discharge does not interrupt an existing institutional-award recipient’s payments. Establish the successor payee or restored competency and actual authority before release.

X.ii.6.F.6.c · Use LAST PAID DATE for the institutional discontinuance

At discharge, discontinue the institutional award using the actual LAST PAID DATE on CURRENT AND HISTORICAL AWARD INFORMATION under 3.558. If a replacement fiduciary exists, amend to that fiduciary and release all funds, including PFOP, if otherwise in order. Notify the VAMC Director when its award is discontinued.

X.ii.6.F.6.d · For an existing institutional award, wait for a contemplated discharge date

Non-bed care may continue indefinitely and competency may return. In the described existing institutional-award case, do not request fiduciary appointment until a contemplated discharge date is known. The VAMC supplies an interim summary and retains the patient on non-bed care while rating and guardianship steps are completed. Do not apply this narrow timing rule to every new fiduciary referral.

X.ii.6.F.6.e · A medical opinion of restored competency still needs rating

Send a summary suggesting regained competency to rating. If incompetency continues, inform the hub over the RO of the rating and impending discharge, using 21-592 if never submitted or a memorandum if already submitted. For a competent rating, use current D.5.a restoration; this block’s D.6.a cross-reference is stale.

X.ii.6.F.6.f · Hub findings may lead to rating reconsideration

The hub can obtain a field examination and either appoint a fiduciary or send evidence supporting ability to manage money to rating. Rating may find the evidence sufficient, order more development or confirm incompetency, then prepare a rating for authorization. A competent rating requires discontinuing the institutional award and applying current restoration procedures. A favorable field opinion alone does not change a VA competency rating.

X.ii.6.F.6.g · Full and current-only PFOP releases use different dates

Terminate an actual PFOP allotment when authorized for needed care, discharge, a new fiduciary or restored competency. For full release, use the date the allotment originally began. For release of current benefits only, use the first of the month after the month for which VA last paid the current fiduciary. Authorize the proper recipient and required hub/Hines actions; do not assume every PFOP account has an allotment.

VI.iv.2.A.1.a · Identify a current legal basis for splitting benefits

Apportionment uses the listed statutes and regulations for specified incarceration or government-provided institutional care situations. A dependent’s financial need alone no longer establishes a new apportionment under the current rules.

VI.iv.2.A.1.b · Protect existing legacy awards without reopening the old rules

Need-based apportionments in place on February 9, 2026 continue until their qualifying circumstances end. There is no authority to increase or reduce a legacy amount. A person may elect a qualifying greater award under the new rules, but once the legacy award is discontinued in favor of it, the legacy award cannot be reinstated. Use C and D for legacy maintenance.

VI.iv.2.A.1.c · Require the correct form from the correct applicant

A claim requires 21-0788 from the person seeking apportionment or on behalf of a minor child. The hospitalized or incarcerated primary beneficiary cannot file that claim for the apportionee. Treat other correspondence as a request for an application under II.iii.2.G.1.

VI.iv.2.A.1.d · Use the benefit-specific eligibility table

For compensation, the listed bases are felony confinement exceeding 60 days, or an incompetent Veteran without a fiduciary in government-provided hospital, domiciliary or nursing-home care; eligible dependents include spouse, children and dependent parents. Pension and survivor benefits have different confinement, care and dependent rules. Do not transfer compensation’s felony criterion or parent eligibility into those benefits.

VI.iv.2.A.1.e · Review statutory bars and the proper claimant

Check the stated crimes, forfeiture and proper-application prohibitions under 3.453. The generic spouse/child wording here must be read with A.1.d, which expressly lists dependent parents for compensation. Resolve a real authority conflict instead of silently deleting that listed class.

VI.iv.2.A.1.f · Convenience is not an apportionment basis

A beneficiary cannot renounce part of a benefit merely to direct VA to pay it to someone else. A qualifying apportionment needs its own authority and applicant; a request to split payments for convenience is insufficient.

VI.iv.2.A.1.g · Check education overlap for the actual dependent

Education benefits do not bar a spouse’s apportionment, a child under 18, or a permanently incapable child aged 18 or older. A capable adult child generally must elect between the listed education and apportioned benefits. Transferred Chapter 33 benefits under 3319 and the stated pre-August 2011 education-program exception may allow concurrent payment; apply the cited school/education rules to the actual benefit.

VI.iv.2.A.1.h · Foreign jurisdiction follows the primary beneficiary

Any RO can process the claim if the primary beneficiary is not a foreign resident, regardless of where the claimant lives. If the primary beneficiary lives abroad, use the designated ROs in X.i.3.A.2.a and the related foreign-case procedures.

VI.iv.2.A.2.a · Screen legal eligibility before unnecessary development

Under proper EP control, deny without further development when the actual applicant, prohibited acts, forfeiture or missing legal entitlement factors establish no entitlement as a matter of law. An unresolved fact is not the same as a proven legal bar.

VI.iv.2.A.2.b · Check whether the reduction proposal already supplied notice

The incarceration or institutional reduction proposal can provide the required notice preceding apportionment, including availability information and 21-0788 to the primary beneficiary and known eligible dependents. Do not duplicate that proposal just because an apportionment claim arrived. The incompetent compensation Veteran without a fiduciary in government care has the separate proposal requirement in A.2.c–d.

VI.iv.2.A.2.c · Institutional compensation needs its own due process

Ordinary compensation is not reduced like pension merely for hospitalization, although SMC A&A can be affected. When an incompetent compensation Veteran without a fiduciary is in government care and a dependent claims apportionment, give the Veteran the specific apportionment proposal before withholding funds otherwise payable or held under 5502(d).

VI.iv.2.A.2.d · Explain the proposed amount, start and temporary ending conditions

The proposal must identify the pending claim, amount, 5307 authority, proposed effective date and matching award reduction. Explain that entitlement lasts only during qualifying government hospitalization or until fiduciary appointment, whichever occurs first. Allow 60 days and good-cause extensions. Consider any applicable A&A reduction when establishing the amount.

VI.iv.2.A.2.e · Start withholding after the actual response period

After the required proposal steps, withhold the apportionment amount from the first day of the month after the month the beneficiary’s actual response period ends. Account for valid extensions before deriving that date.

VI.iv.2.A.2.f · Develop missing claimant evidence concurrently

A complete 21-0788 often needs no further claimant development. If material facts are missing, request them with 30 days and explain decision on the record afterward unless good cause extends the period. Send that request at the same time as any needed primary-beneficiary proposal. Hearing requests use X.v.1.D.

VI.iv.2.A.3.a · A dependent need not already be on the Veteran’s award

A properly established dependent relationship can support apportionment even if the primary award does not include that dependent. Adding the dependent to the primary award still requires the beneficiary’s prescribed form; the apportionee’s proof cannot substitute for it.

VI.iv.2.A.3.b · Develop an unsupported child-relationship dispute

If sufficient evidence already establishes that the person is not a qualifying child, deny and give the appropriate notices. If the assertion needs evidence, request it from the primary beneficiary with 30 days. Continue processing if no response arrives or the evidence is insufficient. An existing child apportionment instead uses C.4.a.

VI.iv.2.A.3.c · Protect minor-child payments until the payee is authorized

After grant authorization, verify automatic EP 590 Expedited Initial Apportionment Field Examination. If absent, establish EP 290 FID-Fiduciary Adjustment for hub routing and upload 21-592. Pending appointment, a competent primary beneficiary’s minor child can be paid through a qualifying E.4 custodian. If the primary beneficiary is incompetent, or E.4 conditions fail, withhold the apportionment until fiduciary appointment.

VI.iv.2.A.3.d · Apply the adopted-out change to current eligibility

The February 9, 2026 regulatory revision ended apportionment eligibility for a child adopted out of the Veteran’s family. Check the timing and protected legacy rules rather than applying this new-claim rule retroactively without authority.

VI.iv.2.A.3.e · Distinguish active duty before and after award

Do not make a new apportionment to a child already on active duty when the claim was received. Do not change an existing apportionment solely because the child entered active duty after the award.

VI.iv.2.A.4.a · Determine the actual available amount

Current apportionments generally use the amount not payable to the primary beneficiary because of the qualifying incarceration or hospitalization reduction. For incompetent compensation Veterans without a fiduciary in government care, apportion all otherwise payable funds to eligible dependents instead of institutional or Treasury holding, accounting for applicable SMC reduction. Since February 9, 2026, 21-441 is no longer required to document an apportionment decision.

VI.iv.2.A.4.b · Divide current multiple shares equally

Divide an apportionment payable to multiple eligible dependents into equal shares. Use the relevant incarceration or death-benefit authority with the actual available amount.

VI.iv.2.A.4.c · Drop fractional cents, not whole dollars

When splitting the amount produces fractions of a cent, drop those fractions under 3.112. Do not round each share down to an even dollar. For example, three shares of $550 are $183.33 each.

VI.iv.2.A.4.d · Choose the correct effective-date branch

Incarceration uses 3.665 or 3.666. Other apportionments generally begin the first of the month after claim receipt. If the primary claim was pending at apportionment receipt, or an unestablished dependent claimed within one year of the primary award, use the later of the primary award’s effective date and the date apportionment entitlement arose.

VI.iv.2.A.4.e · Age 18 requires a new child claim and school review

Terminate an under-18 child apportionment at 18. A child claiming within a year can begin the first month after the birthday if school attendance continued, or the first month after school began following a break; adjust other shares. Later claims use the ordinary effective-date rules. The child must submit 21-0788 and establish school attendance as required. The child’s 21-674 cannot establish the primary beneficiary’s additional dependency award.

VI.iv.2.A.4.f · Keep future shares aligned with the primary award

Future primary-award rate changes not payable to the primary beneficiary flow to the apportionees. Do not provide an apportionee a future rate period beyond the last future period established on the primary award.

VI.iv.2.A.4.g · Use contested-claim notice and a 60-day Board appeal

Generally notify both parties of the decision, amount and date if granted, reasons, evidence, representation rights and the 60-day Board appeal opportunity. Attach 20-0998; supplemental claims and HLR are unavailable for contested decisions. Favorable-finding and unmet-element discussions are not required. A denial without an apportionment-specific proposal need not be sent to the primary beneficiary.

Explain temporary entitlement and ending without due process when qualifying incarceration or hospitalization ends. For a child under 18, also explain termination at 18 and the child’s required 21-0788 and school certification to continue.

VI.iv.2.A.4.h · Late evidence can require a new application

Evidence received after the 60-day appeal period for a denied apportionment is treated as a new claim; request 21-0788 if absent. If an appeal is already pending at the Board, send the additional evidence to the Board under II.i.1.A instead.

VI.iv.2.A.5.a · Check full withholding and the incarceration exception

A full 1151 offset or separation-benefit recoupment normally leaves nothing to apportion. During qualifying felony incarceration, reduce full separation-benefit recoupment to the 3.665(d) amount from day 61 so the remaining compensation can be apportioned. When incarceration ends, apportionment ends and full recoupment resumes. This exception does not erase a full 1151 offset.

VI.iv.2.A.5.b · Explain a denial when no funds are available

If the entire award is offset or withheld and no exception applies, deny, explain the lack of available benefits and the approximate end of the withholding, and tell the claimant to submit a new claim when funds are expected. Attach 20-0998 and clear the pending EP after completing the actual notice.

VI.iv.2.A.5.c · Use the remaining balance after a partial offset

Where only compensation attributable to particular disabilities is subject to 1151 offset or severance recoupment, determine apportionment from the remaining payable compensation. Apportion the available part that cannot be paid to the Veteran during the qualifying incarceration or hospitalization, not the unreduced total award.

V.ii.2.B.1.a · Identify the exact presumption and qualifying service

Each disease/exposure rule has its own service, manifestation and sometimes compensable-degree requirements. The table is an index, not a universal one-year rule. Check the actual statute/regulation and current disease-specific guidance; 3.311 radiation development is distinct from an automatic presumption.

V.ii.2.B.1.b · Establish whether a cancer is primary or metastatic

Review pathology and obtain medical clarification when origin is unclear. A cancer at a listed site must be primary for that exposure presumption; separate primary cancers can coexist. Metastasis from a service-connected primary can support secondary service connection.

V.ii.2.B.1.c · Use the rating criteria from the manifestation period

Where a compensable level is required during a historical period, apply the criteria in force then. A later, more favorable schedule cannot by itself prove compensability during the earlier required period.

V.ii.2.B.1.d · Require affirmative, reasoned evidence to rebut a presumption

Rebuttal needs full-record affirmative evidence and sound medical reasoning. A negative exposure opinion alone, genetic predisposition, an incorrect preponderance standard or an inadequately explained alternate cause is insufficient. Address why exposure is excluded as contributory or medically unlikely under the stated standard.

V.ii.2.B.1.e · Recognize the supported metastatic-cancer example

The example finds sufficient rebuttal where medical evidence establishes that the listed-site cancer spread from a non-listed primary and specifically explains why exposure did not cause it. The actual medical reasoning, not the mere word metastatic, supports the result.

V.ii.2.B.1.f · Recognize an insufficient alternate-cause opinion

The example's opinion suggesting hepatitis caused lymphoma did not affirmatively exclude exposure as contributory and used inadequate reasoning/standard. A possible competing cause does not automatically rebut the presumption.

V.ii.2.B.1.g · Consider symptom evidence before the formal diagnosis

Review competent lay and medical evidence of onset during the required period. Observable symptoms or a reported contemporaneous diagnosis can support a later diagnosis; where appropriate, obtain an opinion connecting the current diagnosis to the earlier symptoms rather than rejecting the claim for a late diagnosis alone.

X.i.3.A.1.a · Identify a genuine special-act award

A special-act award is authorized by an actual private law. A congressional inquiry or recommendation is not itself a law establishing entitlement.

X.i.3.A.1.b · Route according to what the private law provides

If the law predetermines only an entitlement factor, the RO retains jurisdiction. A fixed payment to designated individuals identified as special entitlement belongs exclusively to Philadelphia PMC. Record the actual act and approval date in award Remarks.

X.i.3.A.2.a · Use the actual foreign-resident compensation authority

Pittsburgh handles foreign-resident rating and non-rating compensation, except Philippine rating claims go to Manila and non-rating claims to San Diego BEST. U.S. territories are not foreign. Pension/survivor and legacy appeal jurisdiction follow their separate listed authorities.

X.i.3.A.3.a · Respect exclusive jurisdiction despite NWQ assignment

The assigned station usually handles newly received evidence, but cannot take action reserved to an exclusive-jurisdiction office. The designated office also must respect a required immediate reassignment before taking further action.

X.i.3.A.3.b · Complete the action and notification at the responsible office

When the designated station properly acts, it completes the rating/authorization, sends the claimant and representative notice and retains the rating, award and notice in the eFolder.

X.i.3.A.4.a · Process foreign mail and the flash correctly

Use Centralized Mail and activate the Foreign flash for the qualifying NWQ-routed claim/appeal with a foreign address. Apply the separate PMC mail alignment; American Samoa, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands remain U.S. territories.

X.i.3.A.4.b · Base a foreign dependent's claim on the primary beneficiary

A dependent living abroad does not by itself transfer jurisdiction. Use the primary beneficiary's residence and entitlement—for example, a foreign apportionee of a domestic Veteran does not automatically move the claim to Pittsburgh.

V.ii.4.A.1.a · Gather the facts that drive the date

Identify the issue, actual claim/ITF receipts, entitlement onset, prior decisions and continuous pursuit, plus possible liberalizing or Nehmer authority. The effective date is a decision based on those facts, not merely an EP field.

V.ii.4.A.1.b · Check specific exceptions before the general rule

The general rule uses the later of claim receipt and entitlement arising, but a more specific rule may govern. Claim date and award effective date are not synonymous.

V.ii.4.A.1.c · Identify when the entitlement facts were first met

Date entitlement arose means when the facts establish the necessary benefit criteria. It is not automatically the date a clinician later documented an already existing disability.

V.ii.4.A.1.d · Reconcile complete, incomplete and intended claims

Consider a timely perfected ITF or incomplete claim and use the earliest one perfected within its own required period. An incomplete claim does not extend an expired ITF. Check applicable temporary receipt guidance for documented emergencies or processing events.

V.ii.4.A.1.e · Do not automatically use a later examination date

A later diagnosis can confirm disability already present at claim receipt. Use a later entitlement date only when the evidence clearly shows the entitling criteria were not met earlier; evaluate the full lay and medical history.

V.ii.4.A.1.f · Separate entitlement from the first payable month

Section 3.31 generally starts payment the first day of the month following entitlement on an initial or supplemental award. Apply its actual exceptions rather than moving the underlying entitlement date to match the payment line.

V.ii.4.A.1.g · Preserve the expressly claimed issue's date for within-scope findings

A supported disability found within the scope of another claim is guided by that expressly claimed issue's receipt date. Do not create a later claim date merely because development identified a more accurate diagnosis or related within-scope issue.

V.ii.4.A.1.h · Limit the special FDC retroactivity to its historical authority

Certain historical fully developed claims qualified for special retroactive dates under the cited law and archived instructions. Ordinary FDC participation does not otherwise create an earlier effective date.

V.ii.4.A.1.i · Compare all supported theories for the best lawful date

Different valid theories can produce different dates. Consider direct, secondary, presumptive and special retroactivity rules and choose the most advantageous one supported by the facts; do not stop after finding the first grantable theory.

V.ii.4.A.2.a · Treat an ITF as a receipt rule, not an award rule

A properly submitted ITF and timely complete application can establish deemed receipt. A historical online initiation date may affect effective-date analysis without replacing the actual claim-receipt field in every VA system.

V.ii.4.A.2.b · Preserve a timely post-service ITF

An applicable claim completed within a year of its active ITF can be treated as received on the ITF date. An ITF within a year of separation can therefore preserve possible day-after-discharge entitlement when the application is timely completed.

V.ii.4.A.2.c · Check duplicate, consumed and supplemental ITFs carefully

An active duplicate ITF does not restart the year; the next applicable complete claim can consume it before a later claim arrives. The examples also show how an applicable ITF can preserve supplemental continuous pursuit under the current rule. Verify the actual receipt, active status, benefit and prior decision dates for each issue.

V.ii.4.A.3.a · Verify all day-after-discharge conditions

For direct SC within a year, check qualifying discharge, continuous active service from incurrence/aggravation and whether entitlement existed the day after separation. Otherwise consider later entitlement or the general rule. Reinstatement after active duty has its own authority, separate from new disabilities.

V.ii.4.A.3.b · A late claim generally cannot use the discharge exception

The example's claim arrived more than one year after discharge, so the later claim/entitlement rule applies. A disability present since service does not by itself eliminate the filing requirement.

V.ii.4.A.3.c · A recent separated period does not cover every old disability

The example involves a disability incurred during an earlier, noncontinuous period without later incurrence/aggravation. Filing within a year of the latest discharge does not automatically give the earlier disability that discharge's next-day date.

V.ii.4.A.3.d · Distinguish a barred final period from earlier eligible service

A dishonorable final period does not qualify for the day-after-discharge exception. Earlier eligible service generally uses the general rule; a pre-discharge claim can still produce entitlement the day after separation because active-service pay barred an earlier payment, not because the barred period became qualifying.

V.ii.4.A.3.e · Check the hospital-rating exception

For a qualifying VA/approved hospitalization exceeding 21 days, service connection granted during hospitalization can support the stated temporary total entitlement from admission. Verify the disability treated and 4.29 requirements rather than applying the exception to every inpatient claim.

V.ii.4.A.3.f · Use the general rule for a separate secondary claim

Ordinary secondary SC is not an increase for effective-date purposes and does not begin merely at the earliest nexus evidence. Distinguish a separately claimed secondary disability from a required complication/residual or other within-scope issue.

V.ii.4.A.3.g · Keep secondary dates consistent with causal entitlement

Secondary SC cannot predate SC of the causal disability. When an unclaimed causal condition is within scope, its date can be guided by the expressly claimed secondary issue; obtain the actual scope and entitlement findings.

V.ii.4.A.4.a · Separate in-service and post-service presumptive onset

For a timely post-service claim, day-after-discharge entitlement requires the stated in-service manifestation and continuous-service conditions. If entitlement first arose afterward, use that date. Outside the year, apply the general rule unless another authority such as 3.114 governs.

V.ii.4.A.4.b · Use actual post-service entitlement onset

The example's hypertension became compensable after service, although the claim was within a year of discharge. The effective date is when entitlement arose, not automatically the day after discharge.

V.ii.4.A.4.c · A new diagnosis after the law change may defeat 3.114 retroactivity

The example's diabetes first arose years after the presumptive law change. The ordinary claim-date result applies on those facts because continuous eligibility from the liberalizing date was not established.

V.ii.4.A.5.a · Identify which increase rule applies

Ordinary increases use 3.400(o), including its factual-worsening lookback. Continuously pursued issues use 3.2500(h)(1); A&A/housebound can use 3.401(a), and terminated basic entitlement has its own bar to retroactive additional benefits.

V.ii.4.A.5.b · Find actual worsening within the preceding year

The one-year lookback requires a factually ascertainable increase during that year before the qualifying claim/ITF. Worsening more than a year earlier does not automatically justify a date exactly one year before receipt.

V.ii.4.A.5.c · Develop all IU criteria and the related evaluation history

Identify when schedular eligibility and inability to maintain substantially gainful employment were met, including a remaining criterion first arising during the year. A related evaluation claim can affect the IU date; IU still requires all applicable criteria and cannot predate underlying SC.

V.ii.4.A.5.d · Distinguish old unemployment from the relevant increase claim

The example does not backdate IU to employment ending years earlier. It ties the later timely IU claim to the related evaluation claim and established eligibility under the specific increase-date rule.

V.ii.4.A.5.e · Treat required complications as increased manifestations

Where governing criteria require separate evaluation of complications/residuals, use the increase rule for their dates. VBMS's secondary coding convention does not convert that case into an ordinary new secondary claim for effective-date purposes.

V.ii.4.A.5.f · Separate increase from active-duty reinstatement

A claim can seek both restoration after service and an increased evaluation. Use the applicable increase facts/lookback and separate reinstatement rule; an increased compensation date cannot fall during active duty.

V.ii.4.A.5.g · Consider A&A or housebound during a retroactive primary award

Section 3.401(a) can support additional benefits when qualifying need arises within the retroactive primary-award period, including spouse A&A. Develop the actual onset instead of limiting every ancillary award to the new claim's receipt date.

V.ii.4.A.6.a · Identify the kind of guidance change

A change in statute, regulation or interpretation can affect dates differently depending on its nature and the claim's pending/final status. Establish the actual change before selecting a retroactivity rule.

V.ii.4.A.6.b · Recognize a substantive liberalizing law

A liberalizing law creates a new and different substantive entitlement. A clarification, procedural change or more readable instruction is not automatically a liberalizing law.

V.ii.4.A.6.c · Determine applicability without unauthorized mass review

Compare the changed standard with the actual pending or new claim and consider favorable or adverse effects. Do not initiate a general review of prior beneficiaries without the specific agency authority directing it.

V.ii.4.A.6.d · Use 3.114 only for a grant pursuant to the change

A qualifying liberalizing law, regulation or VA issue may permit retroactivity for pending, denied or later-filed claims. Identify actual potential entitlement when the change took effect and the substantive basis of the grant.

V.ii.4.A.6.e · Identify where the liberalizing authority originated

Congressional statutes and VA regulations can create liberalizing entitlement. Use the actual enacted or issued text and effective date, not the date a training aid explained it.

V.ii.4.A.6.f · Identify the actual VA issue

A VA issue arises through the relevant existing or new regulation. Establish whether it substantively changes entitlement before applying the law-change award rules.

V.ii.4.A.6.g · Confirm the grant rests on the favorable change

Section 5110(g) requires a liberalizing authority and a grant pursuant to it. Compare supported theories for the most advantageous lawful result; a law change unrelated to the actual basis of the grant does not supply retroactivity.

V.ii.4.A.6.h · Develop continuous eligibility from the liberalizing date

For 3.114, establish the required eligibility on the law's effective date and continuously through the award and retroactive period. Apply the requirements to the actual benefit rather than assuming every now-presumptive condition existed when the law changed.

V.ii.4.A.6.i · Keep pension and Parents' DIC income rules separate

For these benefits, income and pension net worth are not continuous eligibility factors for 3.114 in the same way as the underlying entitlement criteria. Actual payable retroactive periods still require their benefit-specific income/net-worth calculation; do not import this exception into compensation generally.

V.ii.4.A.6.j · Review the entire historical pension example

The example meets age-related eligibility but income exceeds the applicable rate for the claimed retroactive period. Liberalizing-law eligibility alone does not prove a payable pension amount or allow choosing a convenient date to avoid the actual facts.

V.ii.4.A.6.k · Account for intervening income in the retroactive period

The example permits initial retroactivity but requires counting a later inheritance and stopping/restarting payment as the income rules direct. A claimant requesting the earlier period receives a review of all its material facts, not only favorable ones.

V.ii.4.A.6.l · Use the correct initiative and timing branch

Review within one year of the law can allow its effective date; later review may allow one year before the actual administrative determination or claimant request. Preserve continuous eligibility, the law's effective-date limit and timely perfected ITF where applicable.

V.ii.4.A.6.m · Compare the old and new versions for favorability

A new rule may allow a grant or greater award; an old rule can remain more favorable by allowing the same result from an earlier date. Compare the actual applicable versions and facts rather than assuming newer is always better.

V.ii.4.A.6.n · Give due process for an adverse law-change adjustment

A previously proper award affected by changed law/interpretation needs the specified proposal and evidence period. Apply the special first-of-month effective-date provision and timely evidence received within the stated processing interval before reducing or discontinuing.

V.ii.4.A.6.o · Allow different evaluations during a retroactive period

The example supports a liberalizing earlier SC date but uses staged evaluations as severity changed. Earlier entitlement does not mean the latest higher evaluation applies to the entire retroactive period.

V.ii.4.A.6.p · Do not apply revised rating criteria before their effective date

Compare versions; apply more favorable amended criteria only from their effective date and the prior criteria to earlier periods. If the older version is more favorable, use it as directed for the pending claim.

V.ii.4.A.7.a · Apply binding precedents according to claim finality

A precedent applies on issuance to relevant pending and later claims, but does not alone reopen finally adjudicated decisions or turn their old interpretation into CUE. A court decision itself is not a 3.114 liberalizing issue; an implementing statutory/regulatory change can be.

V.ii.4.A.7.b · A pending claim can predate the favorable court decision

The example's claim was pending when the precedent issued, so the applicable claim date can precede the court's date. Do not automatically restrict every precedent-based allowance to the day of the opinion.

V.ii.4.A.7.c · Review a still-nonfinal decision under the binding holding

The example shows a favorable holding applied while the earlier decision remained nonfinal. The actual notice, review and finality history determines whether the earlier claim remains available.

V.ii.4.A.7.d · Distinguish a court ruling from its liberalizing regulation

When VA issues an actual liberalizing regulation implementing a holding, 3.114 can affect a later claim's date. Identify that regulation and effective date rather than treating the court opinion alone as the liberalizing issue.

V.ii.4.A.7.e · A later claim gets no automatic court-based lookback

Without a liberalizing regulatory change, the example's claim filed after the favorable precedent uses the applicable claim-date rule. The favorable ruling alone does not produce one-year retroactivity.

V.ii.4.A.7.f · Identify whether a General Counsel opinion changes law

Most opinions clarify existing law and do not trigger 3.114. A specific new interpretation replacing an erroneous prior one can be different; examine the actual opinion rather than assigning retroactivity to every precedent opinion.

V.ii.4.A.8.a · Do not adjudicate a freestanding date request against a final decision

A finally adjudicated RO date cannot be changed through a bare request for an earlier date. A valid CUE allegation must identify the factual or legal error; verify finality and any actual pending review before applying this rule.

V.ii.4.A.8.b · Route a specific CUE allegation or give the required response

A stated CUE with specific errors follows X.ii.5.A.2.a–b. A request lacking a specific qualifying allegation receives the response under A.2.c; 'my date is wrong' alone is not a valid CUE pleading.

VI.ii.3.A.1.a · Identify paid training periods

Drill pay covers the military payment for specified Guard/Reserve duty. The count is paid training periods, which may exceed the number of calendar days attended; verify the actual fiscal-year information.

VI.ii.3.A.1.b · Avoid payment of both benefits for the same periods

VA benefits and military training pay cannot both be retained for the covered periods. The Veteran may elect the permitted benefit, and VA must identify the actual overlap before adjusting the award.

VI.ii.3.A.1.c · Understand the annual match and notice

The annual military-data match identifies potential concurrent payments and Hines sends the election/proposal information. A matching record starts review; it does not by itself resolve a disputed count or prove that a proper notice was mailed.

VI.ii.3.A.1.d · Check what Hines printed on the form

Review the fiscal year, reported paid days and proposed benefit waiver. Reconcile the form with the actual award and military information; changes after generation can alter the proper adjustment.

VI.ii.3.A.1.e · Identify non-award days

Non-award days are periods for which VA benefits were not payable under this process. Identify them from the actual award; they affect the calculation of benefit days subject to waiver.

VI.ii.3.A.1.f · Check how non-award days changed the printed count

The Hines form can already reflect its non-award-day calculation. Do not subtract the same periods again; review the underlying data before accepting or changing the printed count.

VI.ii.3.A.1.g · Use the special non-award-day calculation

Apply the source's calculation rules and official calculator, including the maximum annual count and 30-day benefit-month conventions. Simple calendar subtraction can create an incorrect count or duplicate a reduction already made.

VI.ii.3.A.1.h · Interpret VIS duty data carefully

Check the actual VIS fields and duty period; a display can combine different kinds of service information. Reconcile discrepancies with authoritative records instead of treating all reported days as ordinary drills.

VI.ii.3.A.1.i · Resolve a form Hines could not mail

Review the EP 290 and uploaded form, reconcile SSN/file identification, and follow the actual no-pay, active-duty, manual-proposal or correction route. Clear the original unsent-form control only with the prescribed replacement action and notices.

VI.ii.3.A.1.j · Explain the Veteran's election choices

The Veteran may agree with or dispute the day count and elect the permitted waiver of VA or military pay. Review the actual selections, certification and signature rather than inferring a waiver from mere receipt of the form.

VI.ii.3.A.1.k · Use the RO version when appropriate

Form 21-8951-2 supports the RO's drill-pay election process, including prospective requests. Its edition, completion and actual election matter for the contemporaneous-notice exception; it is not interchangeable with an unsigned annual match.

VI.ii.3.A.2.a · Do not substitute a typical annual count

A typical training year can produce 63 paid periods, but actual duty varies. Verify the reported count rather than applying 63 days to every reservist or Guard member.

VI.ii.3.A.2.b · Count paid periods rather than attendance dates

A calendar day can include multiple paid drill periods. Use the military-certified payment periods, with the source's active-duty treatment, instead of assuming one VA waiver day for each date at the unit.

VI.ii.3.A.2.c · Check whether travel time was paid

Include or exclude travel according to whether it generated the relevant military pay under the actual duty rules. Travel on the calendar does not itself establish another paid drill period.

VI.ii.3.A.2.d · Apply the example to the actual duty record

The example illustrates conversion of paid training periods into VA waiver days. Reproduce the method using the Veteran's verified figures, not the example's annual total.

VI.ii.3.A.2.e · Treat active-duty training by its actual paid days

A Veteran paid only for active-duty training may have a different total from a typical drill schedule. Use the actual service and pay evidence and the applicable non-award adjustment.

VI.ii.3.A.3.a · Verify eligibility for automated adjustment

Only qualifying cases follow the automated Hines adjustment after the actual notice and response opportunity. Confirm the real automation result and absence of a disqualifying response; a dashboard status alone is insufficient.

VI.ii.3.A.3.b · Stop automation when manual handling is required

Apply Drill Pay – Manual Process for the specified disputes, elections, hearing or other manual-processing circumstances. Retain the separate development and response controls so automation cannot implement an unresolved adjustment.

VI.ii.3.A.3.c · Preserve the hearing despite automation

A timely hearing request holds proposed action through the protected hearing process. Late requests still require a hearing unless withdrawn, while the award treatment depends on the completed-form/no-form branch. Apply the specific timing and manual-processing instructions.

VI.ii.3.A.4.a · Develop apparent active-duty overlap

When the data suggest active duty in the same fiscal year, request the actual duty information and allow the stated 30-day response. Apply the source's no-response assumption only after that development; do not assume every large drill total proves active duty.

VI.ii.3.A.4.b · Adjust active duty before recalculating drills

Complete the applicable active-duty award adjustment, then use the official calculator and actual non-award periods to determine remaining drill withholding. Retain the calculation and avoid withholding twice for the same benefit period.

VI.ii.3.A.4.c · Identify the purpose of ADSW

Active Duty for Special Work can have different treatment depending on the actual duty purpose. Verify the orders and service classification rather than treating the ADSW label as conclusive active-duty or training evidence.

VI.ii.3.A.5.a · Check signature, elections and certification

Return an unsigned form for completion. Review the actual election boxes and day count; blank election boxes on an otherwise completed form have the source's default treatment. Obtain unit certification when required for changed days, preserving the specified evidence/retirement exceptions.

VI.ii.3.A.5.b · Accept a sufficient written equivalent

A signed communication can provide the information otherwise supplied by the form if it contains the required fiscal year, count and election. Verify any required certification and notice authority; an informal statement is not automatically a completed modern-form notice exception.

VI.ii.3.A.5.c · Choose the correct processing branch

Distinguish agreed/disputed days, waived military pay, no actual VA payment and active-duty overlap. Resolve certification and outstanding development before adjustment, and prevent automation when the selected branch requires manual handling.

VI.ii.3.A.5.d · Process a valid military-pay waiver

Check the fiscal year, written election and the one-year limit measured from the later applicable notice or fiscal-year ending date. Send the required service/RPC communication and notify the Veteran of the actual result; do not reduce VA benefits while treating military pay as waived.

VI.ii.3.A.5.e · Review a request to reverse the military-pay waiver

Verify the signed request and the source's one-year period from waiver notification, then coordinate with the appropriate military pay authority and implement the authorized VA adjustment. The cross-reference to the denial-notice step does not replace a notice explaining an actually implemented reversal.

VI.ii.3.A.5.f · Reconcile intervening award changes

Review adjustments made or pending after the annual form was generated. Recompute affected rate/day periods and required notice so an older Hines proposal does not implement an amount that no longer matches the actual award.

VI.ii.3.B.1.a · Use the proper rate and actual notice

Calculate withholding from the specified fiscal-year-end monthly rate and verified paid periods, subject to the following exceptions. Confirm written due process or a valid contemporaneous exception; a telephone call alone does not replace a required proposal.

VI.ii.3.B.1.b · Choose the proper withholding start

The ordinary start is the first day of the current fiscal year, October 1, but lower rates, future-payment effects and overlapping awards can require a different start. Use the actual award history and the applicable exception.

VI.ii.3.B.1.c · Count 30-day benefit months

Each benefit month counts as 30 days for withholding. For example, 55 days beginning October 1 resume November 26; 93 days resume January 4. Section 3.31 does not delay that resumption to the next month.

VI.ii.3.B.1.d · Handle advance drill elections prospectively

A Veteran may request advance withholding for expected paid training. Verify the election and planned count, use the proper award/notice process and preserve the later correction opportunity if actual paid days differ.

VI.ii.3.B.1.e · Exclude a temporary total rate when directed

If a temporary 100-percent rating was in effect on the fiscal year's last day, use the source's non-temporary rate for the drill calculation. Do not automatically recover each day at a temporary hospital/convalescent rate.

VI.ii.3.B.1.f · Resolve a withholding rate above the October rate

Use the most recent qualifying award period capable of supporting the required withholding and follow the specific response, hearing and active-duty conditions. Do not create an invalid negative payable award at an insufficient rate.

VI.ii.3.B.1.g · Distinguish a zero year-end rate from no payable year

If the year-end rate was zero, examine prior payable periods and the source's alternate-rate rules. No benefits payable for the whole relevant period is different from benefits stopping late in the year.

VI.ii.3.B.1.h · Avoid inappropriate future withholding

If using the current October 1 period affects a future payment as described here, use the first day of the previous fiscal year or the appropriate later available period. Check rates and prior withholding to avoid duplicating recovery.

VI.ii.3.B.1.i · Separate the incarceration period and drill rate

Use the actual incarceration reduction dates, benefit rate and drill withholding period. A year-end incarceration reduction does not automatically establish the ordinary drill rate; apply the stated prior-rate and overlap rules.

VI.ii.3.B.1.j · Protect affected apportionees

Review the primary and apportioned awards together and provide the required notices to affected recipients. Drill withholding cannot be entered as if the Veteran alone received the entire unreduced award.

VI.ii.3.B.1.k · Reissue a materially more adverse proposal

If the withholding amount or day count increases after the proposal, issue the corrected written proposal with the required response opportunity. A start-date-only change without increased adverse impact is treated differently.

VI.ii.3.B.1.l · Enter and authorize the actual award

Use current VBMS Awards instructions, the verified fiscal year, rate and benefit-month dates. Complete the actual authorization and notice/debt actions; completing a calculation in this tool does not change VA payments.

VI.ii.3.B.2.a · Correct overlap with a return to active duty

Reconcile withholding already made with the active-duty discontinuance. Shift the withholding where permitted; if the prescribed overlap cannot be avoided, use the source's half-rate/double-day method and required new proposal rather than recovering the same benefit twice.

VI.ii.3.B.2.b · Correct drill withholding during incarceration

Identify the actual day-61 reduction and overlapping paid periods, then reverse/recalculate only the affected withholding. This block's older incarceration cross-reference points to a moved section; current compensation incarceration is VI.iv.1.A.

VI.ii.3.B.2.c · Recalculate when a retroactive award changes the rate

A retroactive rating/award may change the compensation rate used for the drill offset. Reconcile the corresponding withholding and actual debt/refund, preserving prior recovery and any required new notice for increased adverse impact.

VI.ii.3.B.3.a · Identify when advance withholding should be restored

If fewer paid days actually occurred than were waived in advance, obtain the required certified evidence and timely restoration request. Actual paid periods, not an estimate or an unsupported revised total, control the restoration.

VI.ii.3.B.3.b · Change the end date using the verified difference

After the source's restoration conditions are met, adjust the withholding end/resumption using 30-day benefit months and the verified count. Complete the actual award and notice and retain any remaining separate dispute or debt controls.

X.v.1.D.1.a · Identify a formal evidentiary hearing

A hearing is a recorded proceeding for sworn testimony and relevant evidence, with optional argument. Initial and supplemental claim issues can qualify; HLR uses its separate informal-conference process.

X.v.1.D.1.b · Understand the hearing's purpose

The hearing lets the claimant present relevant facts and argument to the deciding activity. It supplements the claim record and does not replace necessary development or a subsequent written determination.

X.v.1.D.1.c · Distinguish testimony from advocacy

Testimony supplies factual evidence from a witness under oath or affirmation. Review its competency and credibility for the particular fact; it is different from a representative's argument about the record.

X.v.1.D.1.d · Identify argument without testimony

Argument advocates how the evidence or law should be applied. VA does not provide a formal hearing solely for a representative to argue without witness testimony; clarify the requested proceeding.

X.v.1.D.1.e · Require mutual visible and audible participation

An in-person hearing includes an approved videoconference where the official and participating witnesses/advocates can see and hear each other. An audio-only claimant cannot complete that formal video hearing.

X.v.1.D.1.f · Assign the qualified hearing official

Use the appropriate rating or authorization official and the source's fiduciary exceptions. The actual subject and deciding authority determine who can conduct and decide the hearing.

X.v.1.D.1.g · Preserve original determinative authority

The official must have authority to make the original determination on the issue. A hearing assignment does not grant an employee authority to decide matters reserved to another activity.

X.v.1.D.1.h · Apply the authority rule to the actual issue

Rating questions belong with a qualified rating official and non-rating questions with the proper authorization official, subject to the specified exceptions. Identify the issue rather than using the EP alone.

X.v.1.D.1.i · Choose an official without prior participation

The hearing official must not have participated in the proposed/prior determination, including approval as a second signer. An official's title alone does not establish the required independence.

X.v.1.D.1.j · Have the hearing official make the decision

The employee who conducts the hearing should issue the subsequent decision. Preserve this responsibility while completing any necessary records or examination development.

X.v.1.D.1.k · Offer the permitted choice if that official is unavailable

Let the claimant choose another hearing or a transcript-based decision by a qualified official without prior participation. Document an oral choice on 27-0820 and send the representative a copy.

X.v.1.D.1.l · Keep sensitive-claim jurisdiction intact

Employee and VSO claimants normally use the station of jurisdiction/RACC arrangement, often by video. A home-station hearing needs the specified written waiver and does not authorize that station to decide the sensitive claim.

X.v.1.D.1.m · Arrange the proper hearing location

Normally use the station of jurisdiction or its approved video arrangement. A hearing at another RO can require a written waiver and still leaves the final determination with the station having jurisdiction.

X.v.1.D.1.n · Verify an appropriate hearing facility

Use a suitable approved room and equipment protecting privacy and enabling the proceeding. A convenient public space is not automatically an authorized VA hearing location.

X.v.1.D.1.o · Meet videoconference privacy and equipment requirements

Use the approved platform and authorized facility/telework arrangement with working camera, audio, recording and private surroundings. Home participation by an official is subject to the stated approval and privacy conditions.

X.v.1.D.1.p · Track the actual hearing request

Use the prescribed hearing indicator, control and workload-recording requirements. Scheduling a date alone does not document all required hearing-request and disposition information.

X.v.1.D.1.q · Review attendance and excuses before closing the hearing

Check cancellation/rescheduling before the scheduled time, incorrect notice address and good cause for absence. Document a true unexcused no-show and close the hearing item using its actual date; route RFD only when no required development remains.

X.v.1.D.2.a · Ask questions without adversarial cross-examination

Explore relevant facts fairly and allow explanation. A question revealing an inconsistency is not automatically improper, but the official must not use hostile or controlling questioning to attack the claimant.

X.v.1.D.2.b · Maintain courtesy and impartiality

Treat participants respectfully, listen and avoid skepticism, sarcasm, anger or signs of prejudgment. Follow the source's professional-appearance requirements and actual office standards for claimant interaction.

X.v.1.D.2.c · Help identify useful missing evidence

Assist in developing pertinent facts and suggest overlooked evidence that could support the claim where appropriate. The hearing is part of VA's non-adversarial evidence-gathering process.

X.v.1.D.2.d · Do not announce an expected outcome

Do not promise or imply a planned decision during the hearing. Explain that the result will be communicated in writing after the evidence is obtained, considered and the decision properly completed.

X.v.1.D.2.e · Handle inappropriate conduct proportionately

Use emergency/security procedures for danger and the source's warning or termination approach for other misconduct. Document a terminated hearing; rescheduling then requires RO discretion and may require security arrangements.

X.v.1.D.3.a · Use the designated hearing coordinator

The RO designates responsibility for scheduling, participant contact and records. Keep the scheduling and hearing communications in the actual claim record.

X.v.1.D.3.b · Acknowledge, clarify and schedule the request

Accept written, electronic or verbal requests, documenting verbal requests on 27-0820. Upload communications and send time/place or video instructions. Obtain required third-party disclosure authorizations and explain the visible/audible participation requirement.

X.v.1.D.3.c · Schedule promptly with applicable priority

Arrange hearings within a reasonable period and predetermination hearings at the earliest available date. Expedite cases entitled to priority; do not impose an invented universal number of scheduling days.

X.v.1.D.3.d · Provide ten days' written hearing notice when required

A timely predetermination request requires written time/place notice at least ten days before the hearing unless the source's mutual waiver is documented. This scheduling period is different from the time to request the hearing.

X.v.1.D.3.e · Document cancellations and changes

Requests may change date or format up to the hearing time, subject to the source's repeated-delay/good-cause rules. Record verbal requests on 27-0820. Switching to video is not itself a hearing waiver; choosing an informal conference instead requires documented withdrawal.

X.v.1.D.3.f · Review and develop before the hearing

Identify issues and missing evidence and request necessary third-party records, but do not postpone the hearing solely while waiting for them. Address a possible favorable resolution without assuming that it cancels the hearing request.

X.v.1.D.3.g · Test the actual facility and recording setup

Review the procedures and evidence, prepare the room or approved video environment and test camera, audio and recording. A scheduled invitation does not prove the hearing can be properly recorded.

X.v.1.D.4.a · Explain disclosure, recording and participation first

Before recording, verify 5571/21-0589 authorizations for third parties, explain the purpose, oath, transcript and going off record. If authorizations or required video participation are missing, use the actual delay, alternative-format or witness-statement options.

X.v.1.D.4.b · Explain the informal process to an attorney

Federal Rules of Evidence do not govern this hearing, leading questions are allowed and the official may ask clarifying questions. This does not permit adversarial cross-examination.

X.v.1.D.4.c · Explain representation to an unrepresented claimant

Explain optional assistance and the availability of VSO representation without requiring membership. If the claimant wants a representative, allow the necessary time or permitted short delay; proceed without one only when the claimant chooses to do so.

X.v.1.D.4.d · Identify the issues without restricting relevant testimony

State the issues and ask the claimant/representative to confirm their understanding. Clarify disagreements rather than using the statement to cut off relevant evidence.

X.v.1.D.4.e · Administer the oath or affirmation

The authorized official swears or affirms the claimant and testifying witnesses before recording begins. Video participants must have the required cameras and microphones enabled.

X.v.1.D.4.f · Record the required opening information

Start the recording with the hearing date/time, official, claimant, witnesses, representative, file number, oath and issues. Briefly state the preliminary explanations already provided off record.

X.v.1.D.4.g · Gather testimony and permit clarification

Invite opening statements, claimant and witness testimony, and fair relevant questions. Address the claimant's objections to witness presence and honor requests to pause the recording, identifying when proceedings resume.

X.v.1.D.4.h · Allow a suitable alternate testimony order

The representative may request that all witnesses testify after the claimant before the official asks questions. Accommodate the permitted order while ensuring all relevant facts are developed.

X.v.1.D.4.i · Use tact when directing testimony

Avoid implying that testimony is unimportant. Ask enough to clarify the pertinent facts without hostile cross-examination or unnecessary interruption.

X.v.1.D.4.j · Close with outstanding evidence and notice instructions

Allow final statements and identify evidence the claimant or VA will obtain, including needed medical releases. Explain that the decision comes only after signature/approval, record the closing time and stop the recording.

X.v.1.D.5.a · Document new claims using the correct intake process

An oral initial-claim intent requires 27-0820 under 3.217 and a corporate ITF update. Requests for HLR or a supplemental claim need the prescribed 20-0996 or 20-0995 and any required benefit forms; hearing testimony alone is not the application.

X.v.1.D.5.b · Use the required review or appeal form

For disagreement with a modern decision, explain the applicable 20-0996, 20-0995 or 10182. Legacy substantive appeals use Form 9 and relevant opt-in information. Address absent decisions/SOCs and apparent untimeliness on the actual record.

X.v.1.D.6.a · Use VBA's official transcription service

Send the recording for official transcription; do not use the video application's automatic transcript. Track Awaiting Upload of Hearing Transcript under Request for Federal Records with the prescribed suspense while it is pending.

X.v.1.D.6.b · Place the official transcript in the eFolder

Upload an electronic transcript or send a hard-copy transcript through the authorized scanning process. Keep the actual official record available for the decision maker.

X.v.1.D.6.c · Limit transcript waivers to the stated legacy cases

Where a legacy appeal is reasonably expected not to go to the Board, such as a complete grant, the official may seek permission not to transcribe. Do not treat this as a general waiver for modern hearings.

X.v.1.D.6.d · Document the signed waiver and retain the recording

Obtain the source's signed written waiver and keep the recording for at least two years. The waiver expressly preserves transcription if the issue later goes to the Board.

X.v.1.D.6.e · Transcribe before a later Board transfer

If the legacy hearing issue goes to the Board, ensure the hearing transcript is in the folder despite any earlier waiver. A retained recording alone does not satisfy that transfer requirement.

X.v.1.D.7.a · Evaluate testimony's credibility and probative value

Consider factual testimony separately from advocacy and evaluate it in the context of the record. Do not assume testimony is automatically conclusive or valueless because it is oral.

X.v.1.D.7.b · Check whether the witness can establish the particular fact

A witness's competency depends on the matter described. Observable symptoms and specialized medical conclusions have different requirements; identify what the testimony can actually support.

X.v.1.D.7.c · Obtain identified corroborating evidence before deciding

Attempt to get relevant records or information identified at the hearing and complete required development before a decision. A completed hearing does not close a new medical-record request.

X.v.1.D.7.d · Request an examination indicated by the hearing

If the hearing or subsequent record review establishes that an examination was or is now needed, request it before deciding. Route the completed evidence to the proper official afterward.

II.i.2.C.1.a · Classify the mail before routing it

Distinguish incoming, in-process, miscellaneous and outgoing mail, then the relevant subclass. Federal tax information retains its protected handling and storage regardless of the ordinary mail category.

II.i.2.C.2.a · Identify priority, action, file or unidentified mail

Priority cases and specified congressional/representative correspondence need priority handling. Other mail may require action, merely filing, or identification before association with a Veteran's record.

II.i.2.C.2.b · Screen priority and action mail through Centralized Mail

Use the CM package procedure and the specific priority correspondence rules. Physical compensation/pension mail goes to scanning as directed rather than being locally prescreened outside the prescribed process.

II.i.2.C.2.c · Deliver centrally printed VSO copies

Copies returned to the RO for a VSO must be delivered to the organization. Do not shred them or send them to scanning and create duplicate eFolder letters.

II.i.2.C.2.d · Use the correct control and date of claim

Establish the minimum required fields and apply the exceptions for pre-discharge/IDES, prematurely closed EP 930 and 800-series controls. A work item's date generally controls its related EP; use the potential under/overpayment issue where required.

II.i.2.C.2.e · File record-only mail without a new EP

Upload mail that requires no action or response into the claims folder. Do not create workload control merely for file mail.

II.i.2.C.2.f · Use the unidentified-mail return process

Where a return address exists but the Veteran cannot be identified, PUR sends the identification letter and QR-linked packet, retaining it in the unidentified queue. A later identifying response can associate the linked documents with the proper eFolder.

II.i.2.C.2.g · Route mail for work already pending

Identify the pending issue and follow the in-process mail screening and association procedure. Avoid creating duplicate claim control merely because additional correspondence arrived.

II.i.2.C.2.h · Record unsolicited evidence with its real receipt date

Use Manage Evidence for evidence not tied to an existing tracked item. Describe it in plain language rather than VA jargon that may be shown to claimants or representatives.

II.i.2.C.3.a · Distinguish unidentifiable from undeliverable mail

Unidentifiable mail lacks the identity information needed for association or record creation. Undeliverable mail is correspondence VA sent that USPS returned because delivery failed; these require different procedures.

II.i.2.C.3.b · Use the correct miscellaneous-mail procedure

Unidentifiable items follow topic 5's identification and approval process. Returned correspondence follows topic 6's address and letter-specific handling.

II.i.2.C.4.a · Choose the outgoing-mail category

Identify express, intraoffice or routine/interoffice mail based on its recipient and urgency. A different delivery category does not remove required privacy or claim-record controls.

II.i.2.C.4.b · Use the appropriate outgoing delivery method

Track express mail as directed, clearly route intraoffice mail, and use centralized printing for eligible routine packages. Claim-related mail for another RO/PMC belongs in CM rather than being sent between offices through USPS.

II.i.2.C.4.c · Verify packages were actually finalized and sent

Finalize necessary Package Manager correspondence and remove erroneous drafts so they are not accidentally mailed. Review actual status and update related suspense where needed. This article uses IN_PROGRESS/SUCCESS terminology; other notice guidance uses FINALIZED, so verify the actual current system and dispatch rather than relying on one status label alone.

II.i.2.C.5.a · Exhaust identification searches first

Mail is unidentifiable only after all applicable record-search options fail. Missing a file number alone does not justify placing it in an unidentified queue.

II.i.2.C.5.b · Document actual identification attempts

Index available identifying fields and follow PUR where appropriate. Certify only searches actually completed, including assistance by another authorized employee; record successful calls on 27-0820 and mark the packet using the prescribed CM action.

II.i.2.C.5.c · Obtain supervisory identification review

The authorized supervisor reviews the packet and attempts identification. If identified, correct indexing and return instructions; otherwise verify the actual searches and required certification before approving the next review stage.

II.i.2.C.5.d · Complete the records-management approval

The RMO/designee verifies that both requester and supervisor documented the required searches. Missing certifications require return/correction; the RMO approval is a separate step, not supplied by the initial user's note.

II.i.2.C.5.e · Recover previously unidentified documents when information arrives

Use the QR-linked association where available or search UM Confirmed packets, download and control/upload the identified records as directed. Previously unidentifiable status does not make the documents irrelevant when identity is later established.

II.i.2.C.6.a · Do not infer abandonment from a missing address

An unknown address alone is not abandonment. If checks caused payment suspension, a valid address and continuing entitlement can support resumption from the day after last payment under the applicable rule.

II.i.2.C.6.b · Separate essential from nonessential returns

Proposals, decisions, evidence requests, questionnaires and examination notices are essential. Ordinary COLA/outreach and similar notices may be nonessential. Classify the actual contents, not just the envelope color.

II.i.2.C.6.c · Handle nonessential returns by the forwarding sticker

With a USPS forwarding address, use the specified EP 400, update the address and resend with Return Mail cover letter before clearing. Without a sticker, follow the electronic filing or paper-disposal instructions; preserve envelopes containing address information.

II.i.2.C.6.d · Search systematically for an essential-mail address

Try telephone contact when possible, then review the folder, USPS sticker, corporate record, CAPRI, authorized locator services and SSA only for active benefits. Document every actual attempt and relevant redacted results. Protect FTI; then choose the legacy, pending-EP or closed-EP resend branch.

II.i.2.C.6.e · Resend correctly while the related EP remains open

Update the address, associate the return and replace the actual letter/tracked item and suspense as needed. For a returned partial decision while deferred issues keep the EP open, use the notice-resend branch without a new EP 400 or unnecessary tracked item.

II.i.2.C.6.f · Use the letter-specific control after the EP closed

Claimant development generally uses EP 930 and renewed requests; third-party development requires the specified rating review. Claimant notice uses EP 400 and Return Mail, representative notice needs its address correction, and other questionnaires retain their own controls. Legacy appeals use their separate EP 170 rules.

II.i.2.C.6.g · Use the final bank inquiry only after other searches

After completing C.6.d, establish the prescribed disappearance/eligibility EP 290. If direct-deposit information exists, request the address from the bank and control 30 days from the actual letter. Resend if found; otherwise follow C.6.i after the full process.

II.i.2.C.6.h · Have rating assess returned development on a completed claim

If the missing third-party evidence could change the decision, or the denial rested on nonresponse, return for specific development. If it cannot affect the decision, the rater records a permanent rationale and instructs the appropriate clearance.

II.i.2.C.6.i · Apply final unknown-address actions only after exhaustion

No award/no claim may permit clearing the completed address control. A pending unpaid claim uses the specified Whereabouts Unknown notice/disposition after full searches; a running award ordinarily needs a proposal and response control. Preserve the separate fiduciary EP 590/600, examination and other due-process exceptions. Do not complete COD when its due-process notice was not received.

II.i.2.C.6.j · Do not automatically extend a valid evidence-request year

Where VA used the actual last known address and exhaustive correction attempts fail, the returned request does not extend the one-year evidence period by itself. Apply the actual request and abandonment requirements.

II.i.2.C.6.k · Offer Agent Cashier delivery when appropriate

A claimant who wants to continue but cannot or will not give a usable mailing address can receive correspondence/checks through an appropriate VA Agent Cashier. Homelessness is not itself withdrawal or abandonment.

II.i.2.C.6.l · Distinguish uncollected checks from correspondence

After 30 days, the cashier returns uncollected checks to Treasury, suspending the award. Uncollected correspondence returns to the RO for the applicable returned-mail procedure rather than automatically stopping benefits.

X.ii.3.A.1.a · Identify a change requiring a proposal

Reducing, discontinuing or otherwise adversely changing existing benefits usually requires advance notice unless a specific exception applies. Establish the actual payment/entitlement effect and governing benefit rule before choosing a letter.

X.ii.3.A.1.b · Give the required notice before acting

Notify the beneficiary or proper fiduciary and representative of the proposed action and opportunity to respond. A proposed rating or internal recommendation is not itself authority to implement an adverse award.

X.ii.3.A.1.c · Apply notice to rating and administrative changes

Both rating and administrative determinations can trigger advance due process. Identify the correct underlying authority; a non-rating lane does not remove the beneficiary's response and hearing protections.

X.ii.3.A.1.d · Use the temporary-award exception only when properly notified

A temporary or delimited award can end without a fresh proposal only when the required original notice explained the actual ending date and conditions. The temporary label alone does not establish that the beneficiary received adequate notice.

X.ii.3.A.1.e · Preserve the incompetency hearing opportunity

A proposed incompetency finding has its own hearing and fiduciary protections. Follow the competency procedure and actual pre-final-action hearing rule rather than automatically importing every ordinary reduction deadline.

X.ii.3.A.2.a · Include every required proposal element

Explain the action, affected benefits and payment periods, evidence and detailed reasons, relevant authority, possible debt and response/hearing/representation rights. An attachment does not replace information required in the proposal itself.

X.ii.3.A.2.b · Make the proposed effect understandable

State the actual current and proposed rates and effective dates, including past periods where affected. Explain what evidence can prevent the change and the applicable response opportunities; use the specific benefit rule and any authorized batch exception.

X.ii.3.A.3.a · Control the proposal from actual mailing

Send an accurate proposal and retain the real mailing date, legal response opportunity and processing control. Continue to consider evidence and hearing requests; elapsed time alone is not final-action authority.

X.ii.3.A.3.b · Send the proposal to the correct recipients

Use the current address and the applicable beneficiary/fiduciary and representative recipients. A returned or incorrectly addressed proposal requires the essential-mail and response-period review.

X.ii.3.A.3.c · Use the hospital A&A notice instructions

For the specified hospitalized Veteran, send the required home and facility copies unless a fiduciary receives the notice. Verify the actual hospital-benefit rule and any signed request permitting earlier action; admission alone does not establish a reduction of all compensation.

X.ii.3.A.3.d · Use the regulation that actually supports the change

An improvement reduction and failure-to-report action can require different legal procedures. Do not rely on a proposal citing the wrong authority even if the eventual amount might be more favorable.

X.ii.3.A.3.e · Correct a materially inadequate proposal

Reissue when required facts/authority were wrong or omitted, or final action would be more adverse than proposed. Restart the opportunity using the same EP and date of claim. A correctly proposed action becoming more favorable generally differs from a defective original proposal.

X.ii.3.A.3.f · Read the correction examples by their actual payment effect

The examples distinguish a necessary corrected proposal from a favorable final result. The third example's favorable/unfavorable wording is inconsistent: a final 40-percent evaluation is more adverse than a proposed 50-percent evaluation and requires the appropriate corrected notice.

X.ii.3.A.4.a · Follow the specialized due-process reference

Use the linked specific procedures for the actual adverse action. This general proposal article does not replace separate competency, incarceration, drill-pay, pension or other benefit-specific requirements.

X.ii.3.B.1.a · Identify the legal proposal period

The adverse-action proposal period gives the beneficiary the required opportunity to submit evidence before the proposed action. Preserve the actual mailed notice and the relevant benefit-specific exceptions.

X.ii.3.B.1.b · Allow the ordinary 65-day processing interval

The legal 60-day opportunity and ordinary 65-day processing allowance are distinct. Do not take routine final action before the processing interval, and still review evidence, extensions and hearings before acting.

X.ii.3.B.1.c · Calculate the claimant's deadline correctly

Exclude the mailing day, include the last day and apply the next-workday rule for weekends and legal holidays. Use the actual mailing date rather than a draft date or intended batch date.

X.ii.3.B.1.d · Keep an extended period under the same control

Relevant evidence, timely hearings, returned incorrect-address notices and other stated circumstances can extend processing. Retain the existing EP and date of claim while tracking the actual unresolved event.

X.ii.3.B.2.a · Act only after adequate nonresponse review

After the response opportunity, insufficient evidence or no response may permit the actual rating/authorization action. Verify there is no timely hearing, material development or other prerequisite still outstanding.

X.ii.3.B.2.b · Explain that a proposal is not a final appealable decision

Use the Decision Review Against Proposal notice for a premature review request. Cancel an incorrectly established review EP, while preserving the valid proposal EP and considering any submitted evidence or hearing request.

X.ii.3.B.2.c · Continue payments for necessary material development

Timely evidence requiring additional development must be addressed before final action. Keep the existing payments and control pending the required evidence review rather than acting solely because the original date passed.

X.ii.3.B.2.d · Distinguish relevant from irrelevant requested evidence

Obtain identified relevant records under the applicable assistance procedure before final action. A request for irrelevant evidence need not delay an otherwise proper decision, but the request still needs appropriate handling.

X.ii.3.B.2.e · Recognize sufficient confirmation of adverse facts

Actual documentary evidence confirming the proposed adverse facts can permit the source's earlier action. A vague response or unverified telephone assumption does not establish that exception.

X.ii.3.B.2.f · Change the proposal when evidence is favorable

Review favorable evidence and amend or discontinue the proposed action as warranted, obtaining the proper decision and notice. A favorable outcome does not automatically withdraw an outstanding hearing request.

X.ii.3.B.2.g · Correct action that overlooked timely evidence

If considered evidence leaves the result unchanged, confirm with proper rights; if it changes the result, revise and notify. If further development is required, restore payments pending completion and explain that the final result can still be adverse.

X.ii.3.B.2.h · Clarify a request to act immediately

Distinguish an unambiguous request for final implementation from a request merely to minimize debt. Clarify uncertain intent or retain the normal response period; do not infer a waiver of protections from an ambiguous statement.

X.ii.3.B.3.a · Use the correct hearing timeliness rule

Ordinary predetermination requests use the adjusted 30-day period; proposed incompetency allows a hearing requested any time before final action. Check actual notice and receipt dates before classifying the request as late.

X.ii.3.B.3.b · Restore payments after premature action on a timely hearing

When final action overlooked a timely hearing request, restore payments, schedule the hearing and explain the correction. Do not leave the erroneous reduction in place merely because a decision notice was already sent.

X.ii.3.B.3.c · Provide timely and late hearings correctly

A timely request protects the proposed action until the required hearing determination. A late request can allow otherwise proper final action after due process, but still requires a hearing unless withdrawn and an open control for its disposition.

X.ii.3.B.3.d · Review good cause before acting on a no-show

When there is no good cause and the full response period expired, make the appropriate evidence-based determination and notice, including the opportunity for a new hearing/reconsideration. Attendance alone does not resolve other development.

X.ii.3.B.3.e · Reschedule an excused absence with proper controls

Accepted good cause requires rescheduling and the specified priority, indicator and tracked-item actions, preserving timely-hearing payment protection. Good cause first raised after final notice requires the applicable decision-review election.

X.ii.3.B.3.f · Document an actual hearing cancellation

Close the hearing item only for a real withdrawal/cancellation and follow the pending or already-final late-hearing branch. Cancellation does not waive an unexpired evidence opportunity or complete unrelated claim work.

X.ii.3.B.4.a · Complete the proper final decision and notice

Use the required rating or authorization determination, actual benefit-specific amount/date and adequate final notice explaining the result, debt and review rights. Continuing payments during notice does not itself change the legal retroactive date.

X.ii.3.B.4.b · Clear only controls whose work is complete

Complete the appropriate EP 600/960 action after final processing. Establish and clear the administrative-error control where directed, and retain outstanding hearing, evidence or other-issue controls rather than clearing everything with one decision.

X.ii.3.C.1.a · Understand contemporaneous notice

Contemporaneous notice explains an action already taken under an authorized exception to advance notice. It changes notification timing, not the evidence or entitlement needed for the underlying adjustment.

X.ii.3.C.1.b · Verify the beneficiary's unambiguous report

The specified beneficiary/fiduciary information about income, marital or dependency status can support immediate adjustment when supplied with knowledge it is used for benefits. Verify identity, content and documentation; a third-party allegation is different.

X.ii.3.C.1.c · Review the actual corporate suspense situation

The stated suspended-record circumstances can permit contemporaneous notice when resuming at the correct rate. Apply the underlying benefit and missed-examination rules; corporate suspense alone is not blanket authority to reduce benefits.

X.ii.3.C.1.d · Use the written active-service or modern drill-form exception

A written return-to-active-duty report or completed 21-8951 dated December 2014 or later / 21-8951-2 dated February 2015 or later can support contemporaneous notice. Older drill forms requiring retroactive debt can require a proposal; verify the actual completed edition.

X.ii.3.C.1.e · Distinguish returned checks from returned correspondence

Suspension for undeliverable benefit checks can use contemporaneous notice. Returned evidence requests or ordinary decision letters are not automatically the returned-check exception.

X.ii.3.C.1.f · Apply the actual garnishment authority

The specified child-support/alimony garnishment of compensation in lieu of military retired pay permits contemporaneous notice. Verify the lawful order and garnishable amount; the article's older garnishment reference has moved to the current garnishment procedure.

X.ii.3.C.1.g · Use the death-termination exception correctly

Reasonable evidence of death, including qualifying third-party information, permits the prescribed termination and contemporaneous notice. Do not attach 20-0998 to this death-termination notice.

X.ii.3.C.1.h · Treat annual EVR instructions as historical

The Eligibility Verification Report reference concerns an older program practice; the last annual EVRs were issued in 2012. Do not generate a new annual EVR requirement from this historical notice example.

X.ii.3.C.2.a · Verify telephone information before immediate adjustment

A telephone report must meet 3.217 and the specific identity, confirmation and documentation requirements. An undocumented call is not sufficient authority to bypass advance notice.

X.ii.3.C.3.a · Send notice despite the advance-notice exception

An authorized immediate adjustment still requires the proper contemporaneous notice to the beneficiary/fiduciary and representative at the current address. The exception does not mean no notice is needed.

X.ii.3.C.3.b · Explain the actual completed action

Include the issues, evidence, law, reasons, effective dates, rates, debt and evidence-access information with applicable review rights. Use the death-specific enclosure exception rather than automatically attaching a standard appeal form to every notice.

VI.iii.3.A.1.a · Identify competing entitlement

A contested claim involves rival entitlement where allowing one claim denies or reduces another. A complaint that someone is undeserving, without asserting competing entitlement, is not enough.

VI.iii.3.A.1.b · Recognize an apportionment contest

Apportionment claims have contested-claim features because payment to another claimant affects the primary benefit. Apply the current apportionment eligibility and its specific notice/payment exceptions as well as the contested rules.

VI.iii.3.A.1.c · Recognize competing relationship claims

Two formal spouse or parent claims create the stated contested relationship situation. Develop the actual legal/factual relationship rather than treating every family disagreement as a contested benefit claim.

VI.iii.3.A.1.d · Check other competing claims and protests

Other cases require the formal competing claims and protest asserting the party's own entitlement described here. Mere objection to another person's conduct is not a substitute for that claim.

VI.iii.3.A.1.e · Use the special fee-contest appeal route

The stated attorney/agent fee withholding or denial decisions use contested review and M21-5 Chapter 8. Board appeal is the route; HLR and supplemental claims are not available for a simultaneously contested decision.

VI.iii.3.A.2.a · Screen possible entitlement and notify both parties

If the later claimant could qualify, notify the original/current beneficiary and develop the rival claim, generally allowing 30 days for response. Do not suspend a running award merely because a competing claim arrived. Where entitlement is impossible on the actual facts, use the specified denial route.

VI.iii.3.B.1.a · Develop with both parties at the same time

Request relevant evidence concurrently rather than finishing one side before contacting the other. Keep every interested party informed of the status, delays and actions affecting the contest.

VI.iii.3.B.1.b · Use development suited to the disputed facts

Different relationship and entitlement disputes need different evidence. Identify the real point of disagreement and request evidence directed to it rather than sending the same generic request in every contest.

VI.iii.3.B.1.c · Provide helpful information to both claimants

Explain the substance of material allegations and identify helpful information or sources already known to VA. Assist each claimant fairly while applying the actual disclosure rules.

VI.iii.3.B.1.d · Ask for proof or an explanation of inability

Each claimant should submit adequate supporting evidence or explain why it cannot be obtained. A lack of response still requires review of what the remaining evidence actually establishes.

VI.iii.3.B.1.e · Reserve a field examination for remaining factual doubt

Use a field examination when necessary after reasonable efforts to obtain evidence leave unresolved facts. Identify the exact doubt and completed development in the request.

VI.iii.3.B.1.f · Apply the proper domestic-relationship authority

Resolve marriage, parentage and related domestic-law questions under their specific rules. A contested label does not itself establish the validity of a relationship.

VI.iii.3.B.2.a · Determine entitlement promptly from adequate evidence

Seek the necessary facts without unnecessary delay and explain that evidence should preferably arrive within 30 days. Preserve the stated one-year opportunity and the possibility of payment to another claimant meanwhile.

VI.iii.3.2.b · Set the evidence control without changing the source heading

Use the prescribed 30-day evidence control. The official heading omits the section letter B; this explanation preserves that original citation rather than inventing a numbered block. The control is not a universal merits-denial deadline.

VI.iii.3.B.2.c · Act when entitlement is established within the evidence year

The one-year opportunity does not always require delaying a decision when the other claimant's entitlement is already established. Apply the actual evidence, notification and contested payment-release protections.

VI.iii.3.C.1.a · Prepare a supported administrative determination

After full factual development, prepare the required administrative decision resolving the competing entitlement. Do not substitute an assumption about family relationships for the actual evidence and legal findings.

VI.iii.3.C.1.b · Obtain the required approval

The VSCM/PMCM or authorized designee approves the administrative decision as specified. Preparing the document or reviewing it in this tool does not supply that approval.

VI.iii.3.C.1.c · Allow one claim and disallow the competing claim

When entitlement is established, prepare the appropriate decisions and notices for all affected parties. Keep the separate appeal and payment controls until their requirements are met.

VI.iii.3.C.2.a · Usually defer release through the contested appeal period

Ordinary contested award release waits for the losing claimant's 60-day appeal opportunity and actual appeal-status review. Apportionment grants are the stated exception to that wait, but retain their own eligibility, notice and payee protections.

VI.iii.3.C.2.b · Notify the successful claimant properly

Explain the successful determination and applicable payment conditions with the required contested review information. A favorable finding does not necessarily mean funds can be released immediately.

VI.iii.3.C.3.a · Notify the unsuccessful claimant and explain review rights

Give the actual denial reasons and 20-0998 with the contested 60-day Board appeal instructions. When there was no possible entitlement, the source permits its specific denial without an administrative decision; do not omit the required claimant notice.

VI.iii.3.C.4.a · Release after the required period and no appeal

After the losing party's appeal opportunity expires without an appeal, implement the successful award from the properly established entitlement date. Check actual submissions and adjusted deadlines before treating the party as nonresponsive.

VI.iii.3.C.4.b · Protect the current beneficiary's running award

A running recipient needs the separate proposed adverse-action protections. A timely hearing prevents final action until the hearing or qualifying no-show process is resolved; contested decision notice alone does not replace the proposal.

VI.iii.3.C.4.c · Use separate dates for losing and winning awards

Reduce/discontinue the losing running award at LAST PAID under the applicable 3.500(f) rule and award the successful claimant from actual entitlement. Apply the specific 3.657 spouse exception where relevant rather than forcing both to one date.

VI.iii.3.C.5.a · Do not unnecessarily hold other benefits for insurance litigation

An insurance interpleader involves its own legal/insurance process and normally does not require delaying otherwise decidable death-benefit claims. Coordinate the actual legal issue rather than assuming every benefit is stayed.

VI.ii.4.A.1.a · Check the restriction on concurrent payment

Ordinary VA compensation and military retired pay overlap is restricted unless a stated concurrent-pay exception applies. Establish the actual retired-pay type and eligibility instead of assuming every military retiree can receive both in full.

VI.ii.4.A.1.b · Treat retainer pay as retired pay

Retainer pay is included in this military-retired-pay procedure. A different military label does not by itself remove the election, waiver or award-coordination requirements.

VI.ii.4.A.1.c · Apply the combined-benefit limit

Without an applicable exception, combined benefits cannot exceed the greater benefit under the governing rule. Apply the actual waiver and retired-pay adjustment rather than paying both gross amounts automatically.

VI.ii.4.A.1.d · Allow the permitted election or reelection

A Veteran may make the permitted election, reelection or waiver under the governing rules. The payment effective date and required form/notice still depend on the actual prior award and receipt history.

VI.ii.4.A.1.e · Explain why a waiver may be advantageous

VA compensation's tax treatment may make waiving an equivalent retired-pay amount advantageous. Explain the actual option and payment effect without treating tax advantage as the Veteran's election.

VI.ii.4.A.1.f · Establish whether retired pay is received

Review the application and military/corporate evidence and resolve uncertainty with the responsible retired-pay center. Do not infer receipt solely from years of service or deny for retired pay that has not been established.

VI.ii.4.A.1.g · Verify the retired-pay amount

Use the current military pay source and relevant historical rates. An unknown amount is not zero; follow B.3's controlled unknown-amount procedure when calculation remains outstanding.

VI.ii.4.A.1.h · Defer payment pending a necessary election

Where an election or waiver is required but missing, defer the affected award action and obtain it. A completed entitlement determination alone does not permit prohibited concurrent payment.

VI.ii.4.A.2.a · Determine whether a waiver is needed

Check the actual concurrent-pay exception, retired-pay type and award circumstances. Full CRDP eligibility can eliminate the waiver requirement, but must be supported by the specified retirement and rating evidence.

VI.ii.4.A.2.b · Review the application's election language

A properly completed application can serve as the election or waiver unless the Veteran affirmatively elects retired pay under its instructions. Read the actual form and selections rather than treating any compensation application as an unconditional waiver.

VI.ii.4.A.2.c · Obtain 21-651 where needed

Use the election/waiver form when the record does not already contain a sufficient election. Explain the restriction and the choice; secure the authorized signer's actual decision.

VI.ii.4.A.2.d · Send waiver certification only as required

Do not routinely forward every election form to the RPC. Provide the requested certification and actual amount/effective date when the center specifically needs it, documenting the communication.

VI.ii.4.A.2.e · Coordinate an established entitlement and election

Once entitlement and the proper election/exception are established, process the award under B's withholding and cutoff rules. An election alone does not settle retroactive retired-pay coordination.

VI.ii.4.A.2.f · Verify all full-CRDP conditions

Check qualifying longevity/Reserve retirement or the specific disability-retirement longevity conditions and the required VA evaluation. A 50-percent VA rating alone is not proof that every disability retiree qualifies for full CRDP.

VI.ii.4.A.2.g · Retain the evidence of full CRDP

Place the required retirement and rating support in the eFolder. A conclusion in a note without the prescribed evidence is not enough for a waiver or initial-award withholding exception.

VI.ii.4.A.2.h · Notify Insurance of the applicable election

Where required, send Insurance Service the actual election or waiver information affecting VA benefits. Compensation award coordination does not automatically complete Insurance's separate notification needs.

VI.ii.4.A.3.a · Process an actual election statement

Review the statement and required rating/corporate actions, including any future-examination control. The current paragraph's future-exam cross-reference is stale; preserve the explicit examination-control instruction rather than using the unrelated Insurance subsection it now points to.

VI.ii.4.A.3.b · Notify a Veteran who chose retired pay

Explain the VA entitlement determinations even when compensation payment is denied because retired pay was elected. The choice of payment does not eliminate notice of the rating and related rights.

VI.ii.4.A.3.c · Explain the waiver option after denial

Provide 21-651 and the restriction on concurrent payment, including the source's time-sensitive election opportunity. Keep the actual denial-notice date because a later election's payment date depends on it.

VI.ii.4.A.3.d · Apply the actual waiver payment date

Use the receipt, prior denial and award circumstances to determine when compensation can begin after a partial retired-pay waiver. The election date and entitlement/payment dates are separate questions.

VI.ii.4.A.3.e · Avoid duplicate separation recovery and retired-pay offset

Reconcile the actual separation-benefit recovery with retired-pay withholding. The same benefit amount should not be recovered twice; coordinate the balances and apply the distinct recoupment and retired-pay authorities.

VI.ii.4.A.3.f · Use the supplemental process after a late election

An election received a year or more after denial can require the actual supplemental claim and waiver. Review any overdue future examination and obtain needed rating action rather than automatically paying from the old denied claim.

VI.ii.4.A.3.g · Explain applicable ancillary benefits

A Veteran who elects retired pay may still qualify for benefits associated with the established VA disability determination. Give the applicable information rather than treating compensation nonpayment as denial of all ancillary eligibility.

VI.ii.4.A.3.h · Complete Insurance notice after the retired-pay election

Notify Insurance Service as directed when compensation is denied because the Veteran chose retired pay. This notification does not replace the Veteran's own decision notice or election instructions.

VI.ii.4.A.4.a · Keep current-law pension's rule separate

Current-law pension does not require the same retired-pay waiver process as disability compensation. Determine pension under its income and entitlement rules; this is not a general exception allowing full duplicate compensation.

VI.ii.4.A.4.b · Review the actual pension election consequences

An election of current-law pension over compensation or older pension programs has its own comparative-benefit and finality consequences. Use the pension authority and actual election rather than transferring compensation reelection rules wholesale.

VI.ii.4.A.5.a · Verify authority to elect for an incompetent retiree

Use a service-recognized trustee or fiduciary and any required State-law court approval. The service department's incompetency finding can prevent the Veteran's personal signature alone from constituting a valid military waiver.

VI.ii.4.A.5.b · Understand the service trustee's separate role

A military finding and trustee designation are not automatically VA's final competency or payee determination. Coordinate the service and VA processes while protecting the election and payment authority.

VI.ii.4.A.5.c · Obtain the VA competency and hub review

Use PEB findings where possible and obtain an examination if needed. Refer the proposed VA incompetency and military trustee for hub action; apply the source's specific award/denial and notice route instead of treating the service finding as a final VA rating.

VI.ii.4.A.5.d · Resolve different military and VA fiduciaries

If the hub does not recognize the service-appointed trustee, send the hub findings and waiver to the service department and request recognition of the VA-certified fiduciary. Supervised direct pay does not remove the military trustee/election requirement.

VI.ii.4.A.5.e · Refer a spouse trustee for suitability review

Send 21-592 so the hub can determine whether the military-appointed spouse is a suitable VA payee or another fiduciary is needed. Military appointment alone does not establish VA recognition.

VI.ii.4.A.5.f · Distinguish institutional election authority

A non-VA institutional trustee may make a military election but needs VA recognition for the corresponding VA election. A VAMC trustee cannot elect VA benefits in lieu of retired pay; use the hub to establish an authorized fiduciary where appropriate.

VI.ii.4.A.5.g · Explain reelection when VA benefits fall

After a total retired-pay waiver, notify the fiduciary about reelection when VA benefits fall or end. With a partial waiver and retired pay exceeding VA benefits, the described service adjustment is automatic rather than requiring a new election.

VI.ii.4.A.5.h · Obtain service acceptance after restored competency

The service department requires its medical-board acceptance of restored competency. Send the VA restoration rating and supporting examination with the election; a VA finding alone does not automatically change the military trustee record.

VI.ii.4.A.5.i · Apply the incompetent-payee withholding safeguards

Follow the actual fiduciary/payee authorization and retired-pay withholding requirements together. An established military waiver does not authorize releasing VA funds to an unrecognized or otherwise unauthorized payee.

VI.ii.4.A.6.a · Recognize historical SCSD payments

Special Compensation for Severely Disabled retirees was a historical program preceding later concurrent-pay arrangements. Identify the period and program instead of labeling every old military special payment current CRDP.

VI.ii.4.A.6.b · Understand CRDP's purpose

Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay restores eligible military retired pay otherwise waived for VA disability compensation. Eligibility and actual payment remain military determinations under the governing retirement and disability criteria.

VI.ii.4.A.6.c · Do not require a separate CRDP application routinely

CRDP generally operates through military eligibility and payment processing rather than a separate VA benefit application. Resolve actual eligibility or missing payment with the retired-pay authority.

VI.ii.4.A.6.d · Reconcile CRDP with the waived amount

CRDP affects the military retired-pay offset, not the underlying VA disability award itself. Use the actual military entitlement and effective dates when reconciling apparent concurrent payment.

VI.ii.4.A.6.e · Use the rate table only for its historical period

The listed CRDP rates support the phased historical program. Do not apply an old table to a current full-concurrent-pay award or use it in place of the actual RPC calculation.

VI.ii.4.A.6.f · Apply the phase-out timetable to the correct year

The offset was eliminated over the stated implementation schedule. Identify the actual historical year and eligibility before reconstructing earlier military/VA payments.

VI.ii.4.A.6.g · Treat the pre-2014 calculation as a historical example

The example explains the former phased CRDP calculation. A current award should use current eligibility and actual RPC figures; the example is not a universal present-day withholding formula.

VI.ii.4.A.6.h · Check the total-rating implementation changes

Total disability, including the applicable IU provisions, had specific concurrent-pay implementation dates. Use the actual rating type and period when reviewing historical retirement offsets.

VI.ii.4.A.7.a · Distinguish CRSC from CRDP

Combat-Related Special Compensation is a military program for qualifying combat-related disabilities. It is not the same benefit as CRDP and does not authorize VA to decide the service's CRSC eligibility.

VI.ii.4.A.7.b · Verify the military eligibility requirements

Retirement and qualifying disability conditions determine possible CRSC. Refer the actual application and supporting evidence to the service department rather than inferring entitlement solely from VA service connection.

VI.ii.4.A.7.c · Use the specific combat-related categories

CRSC combat-related disability includes the source's armed-conflict, hazardous-service, simulated-war and instrumentality categories. A service-connected disability is not automatically combat related for this program.

VI.ii.4.A.7.d · Tell eligible herbicide claimants about CRSC

Provide the required possible-CRSC information for the stated Agent Orange-related award situation. This is an invitation to apply to the military service, not an award of CRSC by VA.

VI.ii.4.A.7.e · Use DD 2860 and the service application route

The Veteran applies for CRSC through the military service with DD 2860 and required evidence. A VA compensation application or award does not replace the military application.

VI.ii.4.A.7.f · Use the military CRSC amount determination

The amount depends on the service's qualifying combat-related disabilities and applicable retired-pay limits. Use the actual service calculation; VA's combined rating alone does not establish the payable CRSC amount.

VI.ii.4.A.7.g · Coordinate evidence with the CRSC board

Provide the requested VA rating/evidence information through the prescribed service-board coordination route. The military board decides CRSC; maintain VA award and records controls separately.

VI.ii.4.B.1.a · Identify awards requiring a retired-pay review

Review the actual retired-pay receipt, waiver/exception and award effect. A compensation grant can require retired-pay coordination even when the Veteran already has an active VA award.

VI.ii.4.B.1.b · Keep the retired-pay indicator accurate

Verify that the corporate retired-pay indicator is active when applicable. It supports transmission and coordination; lack of withholding does not necessarily mean the indicator should be removed.

VI.ii.4.B.1.c · Enter the actual retired-pay history

Record the correct pay type, branch, rates and dates, with at least one type other than DMDC. Unknown gross remains blank; entering zero can deactivate the indicator. Read this block's mixed date instructions with the context-specific B.3 instructions.

VI.ii.4.B.1.d · Remove the indicator only after entitlement ends

Confirm retired-pay entitlement actually terminated before using the entry that removes the indicator. A missing amount, temporary nonpayment or transfer to another retirement status is not proof of termination.

VI.ii.4.B.1.e · Verify branch and SSN before transmission

The correct paying branch and corporate SSN are necessary for reliable RPC matching. Correct discrepancies and retain the supporting evidence before relying on automated exchange.

VI.ii.4.B.1.f · Understand what VA sends to the RPC

VA transmits specified award data for retired-pay adjustment. The exchange depends on accurate corporate fields and authorization; preparing an award without authorizing it does not establish successful military coordination.

VI.ii.4.B.2.a · Apply withholding and its narrow exceptions

Calculate ordinary withholding with the official tool and actual RPC data. Initial compensable full-CRDP awards need the prescribed evidence; restored benefits require written RPC certification for the no-retro-adjustment exception. A phone call or ordinary RCPS screen is not that written certification.

VI.ii.4.B.2.b · Separate entitlement from payment commencement

Use the actual election and entitlement facts and the applicable payment-start rule. Retired-pay withholding dates are another calculation; do not replace all three with the claim's receipt date.

VI.ii.4.B.2.c · Check the actual current authorization cutoff

Use Compensation Service's posted calendar/time and one-hour moratorium. If the cutoff is missed, regenerate the required withholding period. Do not hard-code the fifteenth or assume that an earlier prepared award was authorized in time.

VI.ii.4.B.2.d · Recognize the RPC adjustment when compensation is higher

The retired-pay center adjusts its payment using the actual VA amount and effective date. Reconcile the military response and interim VA payable difference rather than assuming the RPC immediately stopped all retired pay.

VI.ii.4.B.2.e · Pay the permitted difference during withholding

When compensation exceeds retired pay, pay the appropriate excess while withholding the required retired-pay amount for the interim period. Release the remainder only from the properly calculated authorization/cutoff date.

VI.ii.4.B.2.f · Use the actual reduction authority

A compensation reduction affecting retired pay must use the benefit-specific effective date and required notice. Coordinate the military adjustment rather than changing the VA reduction date merely to fit an RPC cycle.

VI.ii.4.B.2.g · Explain the possible retired-pay tax benefit

Provide the required information about possible tax exemption following a VA determination. The Veteran uses the appropriate tax/retired-pay process; VA's notice does not itself amend a tax return.

VI.ii.4.B.3.a · Recheck unknown pay immediately before authorization

Obtain fresh RCPS/DFAS or Coast Guard information just before acting. Distinguish a missing account from an existing uncalculated account, and obtain retirement orders or the service response as required.

VI.ii.4.B.3.b · Enter current and prior RPC rates correctly

Use the actual current/prior dates and amounts; retain both where different, using the current entry where the stated duplicate-date or zero-prior conditions apply. Unknown values must not be invented as zero.

VI.ii.4.B.3.c · Control an uncalculated retired-pay award

Apply the source's cutoff and six-month-from-retirement exceptions. Otherwise distinguish an existing compensation recipient's increase from a new recipient's full withholding. Authorize the actual award and establish EP 290 with the correct IDES/BDD label, Awaiting MRP Information and 10-day tracked item; leave unknown gross blank.

VI.ii.4.B.3.d · Follow up a DFAS verification EP

Recheck the actual entitlement/waiver data and separation-based six-month threshold. Blank or missing waiver information has different 10-day and 10-working-day actions; escalate as directed and do not release funds while the RPC discrepancy remains unresolved.

VI.ii.4.B.3.e · Use the Coast Guard verification route

Coast Guard, NOAA and PHS cases use the specified Coast Guard contact and evidence documentation rather than assuming DFAS coverage. This table uses more than six months after separation for its unanswered-account release condition; preserve that difference from the DFAS boundary.

VI.ii.4.B.3.f · Handle a 31st-day retirement record correctly

Apply the source's adjustment when the retirement or separation date falls on the thirty-first. This corporate retired-pay entry convention does not change the actual service date or create a new entitlement period.

VI.ii.4.B.3.g · Protect an existing award when unknown pay becomes known

Reconcile the actual RPC gross/waiver dates and preserve compensation already properly payable before the waiver. Withhold only the affected increase or remaining amount as directed and retain a verification EP for unresolved gross information.

VI.ii.4.B.4.a · Prevent avoidable duplicate payments

Both VA and the RPC must provide accurate timely adjustment information. Verify the actual exchange, authorization dates and amounts instead of assuming an automated record has already prevented an overpayment.

VI.ii.4.B.4.b · Identify which agency collects the debt

Responsibility depends on which payment produced the overpayment under the coordination rules. Do not recoup a military debt as a VA debt merely because both awards appear in the same review.

VI.ii.4.B.5.a · Apply the historical Section 306 election rule

A Section 306 pension recipient electing retired pay follows that program's specific termination and notice instructions. It is a pension branch, not a general compensation election template.

VI.ii.4.B.5.b · Check whether Section 306 can be reelected

Reelection of this protected historical pension depends on the source's precise circumstances. Do not assume that compensation's unrestricted reelection rule restores every terminated older pension program.

VI.ii.4.B.5.c · Confirm an existing recipient's retired-pay election

Contact the Veteran to confirm an apparent election against compensation. For a reported mistake, obtain the timely correction and prescribed control; if confirmation/correction remains unresolved, use the proper proposal. A confirmed election stops compensation from actual receipt under the source's rule.

VI.ii.4.B.5.d · Process compensation reelection from its actual receipt

Use the actual reelection date and the required retired-pay withholding/coordination rules. A prior compensation rating does not permit unverified retroactive duplicate payment.

VI.ii.4.B.5.e · Check timely election after a prior denial

The period from the actual denial notice affects the new award date. A timely 21-651 and a later supplemental claim are different branches; preserve any necessary new examination or rating review.

VI.ii.4.B.5.f · Check the special service-connected hospital circumstance

Hospitalization for a service-connected disability can create a specific more-advantageous compensation election opportunity. Verify actual hospital entitlement and the source's notification/election requirements rather than automatically canceling retired pay.

VI.ii.4.B.5.g · Apply the timely hospital election rule

When 21-651 is timely received under the special hospital provision, use the established hospital entitlement and applicable payment-start rule. Do not confuse that entitlement date with the form's receipt date or omit retired-pay coordination.

VI.ii.4.B.6.a · Verify the reason for TDRL removal

Removal from the Temporary Disability Retirement List can lead to permanent retirement, discharge or severance. Obtain the actual service disposition; removal alone does not prove that retired-pay entitlement ended.

VI.ii.4.B.6.b · Update an existing VA award after actual TDRL disposition

Confirm whether retired pay continues and adjust the indicator/withholding accordingly. Preserve unknown gross as blank and avoid removing the indicator when the Veteran simply moved to permanent retirement.

VI.ii.4.B.6.c · Notify a nonrecipient of the relevant options

Review the actual VA entitlement/election history when TDRL removal affects someone not receiving VA benefits. Provide the appropriate election or claim instructions rather than starting compensation without the required submission.

VI.ii.4.B.6.d · Review new severance after TDRL removal

A new severance payment requires the separate disability-severance verification, combat/date exception and recoupment review. Coordinate the retired-pay ending so the same payment period is not offset twice.

VI.ii.4.B.7.a · Keep pension hospitalization adjustments separate

A reduction under 3.551 uses the pension hospital-care authority and its retired-pay/election implications. It is not an instruction to reduce ordinary compensation solely because the Veteran entered a hospital.

VI.ii.4.C.1.a · Use the designated retired-pay coordinator

Each office designates the responsible MRP coordinator. Route the matters assigned to that role through the prescribed coordinator rather than sending unresolved payment discrepancies to an arbitrary activity.

VI.ii.4.C.1.b · Identify the coordinator's responsibilities

The coordinator manages the specified liaison, complex cases and retired-pay corrections. Supply the actual award history, RPC evidence and unresolved question so coordination can produce a usable determination.

VI.ii.4.C.2.a · Use VIS as supporting military information

Review VIS for the relevant retired-pay information, but obtain current RPC confirmation where required for amounts, waivers or authorization. A display is not a substitute for a specified written certification.

VI.ii.4.C.2.b · Contact DFAS through the authorized channel

Use the current DFAS route for the service and question. State the actual account, award dates and information needed, retaining the separate protected handling requirements.

VI.ii.4.C.2.c · Document the actual DFAS contact

Record the contact and substantive response in the claim record, including the relevant amount/date or unresolved issue. An attempted call without a confirmed answer does not establish payment authority.

VI.ii.4.C.2.d · Route non-routine and SBP matters correctly

Use the designated coordination route for non-routine retired-pay and Survivor Benefit Plan questions, with the source's follow-up expectations. These issues should not be resolved by guessing from an ordinary retired-pay screen.

VI.ii.4.C.2.e · Use the SBP entitlement point of contact

Survivor Benefit Plan entitlement questions go to the specified military point of contact. A VA compensation processor does not determine SBP merely because the record also contains a VA award.

VI.ii.4.C.2.f · Choose the RPC for the actual service

DFAS covers the listed Armed Forces branches; Coast Guard retired-pay processing also covers NOAA and Public Health Service. Use the proper center and do not expect every retiree in DFAS data.

VI.ii.4.C.3.a · Keep automated award transmission reliable

Accurate retired-pay indicators, branch/SSN and authorized award data support automatic RPC transmission. Verify these prerequisites before relying on the exchange to adjust military payments.

VI.ii.4.C.3.b · Act on RPC adjustment notifications

Review the actual RPC notice against the VA award and take the required correction or verification action. Retain the notification and distinguish a requested change from a completed VA transaction.

VI.ii.4.C.4.a · Identify military responsibility after a compensation COLA

The RPC uses the legislative compensation increase information to adjust retired pay. Coordinate actual effective dates and amounts; the routine VA COLA does not excuse checking a reported military nonreceipt.

VI.ii.4.C.4.b · Understand the COLA data exchange

VA supplies the specified legislative-increase data to RPCs. Missing or inaccurate indicators can prevent the expected adjustment; verify the actual corporate and transmission information.

VI.ii.4.C.4.c · Determine which agency recovers a COLA overpayment

Use the source's responsibility rules and actual adjustment timing to identify the collecting agency. Avoid duplicate VA and military recovery of the same legislative-increase overlap.

VI.ii.4.C.4.d · Work the nonreceipt report through its branches

Review each NRPS legislative-increase nonreceipt entry, including repeated lines, missing indicators and waiver status. Complete the actual correction and agency coordination rather than clearing the report because a later award exists.

VI.ii.4.C.4.e · Resolve compensation paid without a required waiver

Establish whether an actual waiver exception applied; otherwise obtain the required election and address the erroneous duplicate payment under the prescribed process. A missing document cannot simply be replaced by assuming consent.

VI.ii.4.C.4.f · Use the special legislative-increase adjustment date

Apply the source's legislative-increase processing/cutoff rule, including the relevant second-month boundary. This is not the ordinary monthly award cutoff and must use the actual action and payment history.

VI.ii.4.C.5.a · Understand RPC action on a VA date error

An incorrect VA effective date can produce a military adjustment or debt. Review the RPC's actual response and distinguish which agency paid incorrectly before taking a compensating VA action.

VI.ii.4.C.5.b · Verify and act on the reported VA error

Compare the RPC notice with the signed VA award and actual correct date, then follow the earlier/later-date branch. Obtain required confirmation or escalation instead of changing dates solely to match an unexplained military entry.

VI.ii.4.C.5.c · Coordinate an error discovered at the RO

Document the actual VA error and contact the RPC through the prescribed route, escalating unresolved cases as required. Do not create a second incorrect adjustment while responsibility or the correct military payment period remains uncertain.

VI.ii.2.1.a · Identify the prohibited duplicate payment

Compensation and separation benefits may not both be retained for the same covered service where the governing statute requires recovery. Identify the exact benefit and service period before withholding; exceptions and nonrecoupable programs matter.

VI.ii.2.1.b · Check whether separation benefits were actually paid

Review the application, discharge documents, corporate history and service information. A suspected benefit or projected payment is not a verified amount; resolve the actual type, payment and prior recovery.

VI.ii.2.1.c · Understand the automated service entries

DMDC information updates VA service records, but automated entries can be incomplete or require clarification. Reconcile the record with actual service and finance evidence before using it for a payment adjustment.

VI.ii.2.1.d · Avoid recovering the same amount twice

Check the prior award and recovery history. An M11 entry alone may show that a benefit existed without proving how much was recovered; obtain the needed finance audit for an uncertain balance.

VI.ii.2.1.e · Apply the older 3814a readjustment rule

This historical readjustment program has its own recoupment and election rules. For the stated non-disability-severance situation with compensation entitlement before September 15, 1981, preserve the source's exception rather than applying modern separation-pay recovery automatically.

VI.ii.2.1.f · Use the former 687 recovery percentage

Readjustment pay under former 10 USC 687 uses the historical 75-percent recoupment basis described here. Verify the actual statutory benefit; this percentage does not apply to every separation payment.

VI.ii.2.1.g · Check the historical election change

Public Law 87-509 changed the relationship between readjustment benefits and compensation. Use the actual entitlement/election history and applicable effective provisions; a present-day claim can involve an older governing benefit.

VI.ii.2.1.h · Identify non-disability severance separately

Non-disability severance is different from disability severance tied to specific unfitting conditions. Apply its governing statute and recovery rules, including the relevant historical entitlement exception.

VI.ii.2.1.i · Identify 1174 separation pay

Separation pay under 10 USC 1174 normally requires recovery from compensation for the covered service. Verify payment and the date-dependent gross or after-tax basis and any exception before establishing withholding.

VI.ii.2.1.j · Distinguish reserve involuntary and special separation pay

Reserve Involuntary Separation Pay is recoupable under its governing rules; Reserve Special Separation Pay is a different program and is not recouped by VA. Similar names do not establish the same recovery authority.

VI.ii.2.1.k · Separate SSB from VSI

Special Separation Benefits and Voluntary Separation Incentive were distinct separation programs. VA recoups SSB as directed; VSI is adjusted by the military paying authority rather than recovered by VA as an SSB lump sum.

VI.ii.2.1.l · Compare lump-sum and installment benefits

SSB is the lump-sum program and VSI uses recurring installments. Verify which was paid and follow its own tax/recovery rules instead of treating any separation incentive as the same benefit.

VI.ii.2.1.m · Let the military adjust VSI

The responsible military authority adjusts VSI to account for compensation. Coordinate the actual award information as required; do not create VA recoupment merely because the Veteran received VSI.

VI.ii.2.1.n · Use discharge indicators to identify the program

Review the actual DD 214 separation-benefit remarks/codes for SSB or VSI and verify ambiguity with the service department. A code helps identify the program but does not establish an audited recovery balance.

VI.ii.2.1.o · Identify VSP and its exceptions

Voluntary Separation Pay generally requires recoupment, but eligibility for retirement, qualifying combat-related special compensation or a service waiver can change that result. Verify the exact statutory and service conditions.

VI.ii.2.1.p · Check VSP discharge documentation

Review DD 214 indicators and obtain finance confirmation where needed. Do not use an unverified projected or unclear entry as proof of the gross payment, taxes or remaining recoupment.

VI.ii.2.1.q · Do not recoup VRI as ordinary separation pay

Voluntary Retirement Incentive is a separate program that VA does not recoup under these separation-benefit procedures. Confirm the actual program before deciding that no VA recoupment applies.

VI.ii.2.2.a · Recover only the amount the rules require

Use the exact program, receipt date, applicable gross/after-tax basis and prior recovery. Do not delay an otherwise proper award solely for missing separation verification when the source's controlled provisional procedure applies.

VI.ii.2.2.b · Verify the actual amount through the correct source

Compare corporate/VIS/discharge evidence and use the prescribed service finance route where insufficient. A projected VIS payment needs its 30-day recheck or confirmation; retain split payment/tax entries and prior recovery rather than assuming one undated amount.

VI.ii.2.2.c · Choose the service-specific verification route

AskDFAS is not the correct route for every branch or historical period. Apply the Coast Guard, Air Force Reserve and older-record exceptions, using their own request and follow-up periods rather than a universal 30-day request.

VI.ii.2.2.d · Apply the benefit, date and tax decision table

Determine whether recovery is required, then its gross or after-tax basis. For covered separation payments before October 1, 1996 use the specified gross basis; later payments and SSB have their own tax rules. Preserve historical 3814a and 687 exceptions and verified prior recoupment.

VI.ii.2.2.e · Check substantive and verification exceptions

Identify the stated VSP retirement/CRSC/waiver and Air Force exceptions. If amount verification remains outstanding, use only the authorized provisional amount or 99999 placeholder with the required control; the placeholder is not a verified debt and must be corrected through the prescribed follow-up.

VI.ii.2.2.f · Verify Federal tax treatment

Use the applicable military withholding rules and actual payment date. A missing tax entry is not necessarily zero tax; disability severance has different consequences from other separation benefits when taxes were not withheld or were refunded.

VI.ii.2.2.g · Calculate the permitted after-tax amount

Subtract the applicable Federal withholding from the gross amount using the source's method. Verify the actual tax basis and prior recovery; do not subtract unrelated State taxes or infer a refund from an empty field.

VI.ii.2.2.h · Compare pension and net compensation correctly

When compensation overtakes pension, compare the actual payable benefit after required separation recoupment and obtain the needed election. Pension entitlement and income remain separate benefit determinations outside the compensation procedure.

VI.ii.2.2.i · Coordinate recovery with retired pay

When military retired pay begins, confirm who is recovering the balance and avoid duplicate recovery. Use actual RPC and VA balances with the prescribed control; retirement alone does not establish that the separation balance is zero.

VI.ii.2.2.j · Adjust withholding under the applicable authority

Recalculate the actual amount when a verified event changes the withholding requirement. Preserve protected compensation and any hardship approval; record the reason, amount, effective date and required notice.

VI.ii.2.2.k · Protect compensation for later service

For covered separation benefits other than disability severance, distinguish disabilities attributable to the service supporting the payment from a later period. Obtain the required rating attribution and do not recover from compensation protected by the later-service rule.

VI.ii.2.3.a · Identify the severance disabilities from the PEB

Use the Physical Evaluation Board findings to identify the unfitting disability or disabilities supporting severance. Obtain the missing PEB through the appropriate service-record route; a general disability list or VIS combat code is not an adequate substitute.

VI.ii.2.3.b · Limit disability-severance withholding correctly

Recovery is tied to the severance disability and its initial compensable rating, subject to the source's temporary-rating, zero-percent and other exceptions. Do not withhold the entire combined award without separating protected non-severance compensation.

VI.ii.2.3.c · Find the actual initial compensable rating

Identify the first qualifying compensable evaluation for the severance disability, with the source's treatment of temporary total ratings and combined zero-percent compensation. A later routine increase does not automatically reset the withholding limit; an applicable same-date error correction is different.

VI.ii.2.3.d · Recheck withholding after a reduction

A reduced severance-disability evaluation can lower the recoverable monthly amount. Apply the actual revised rating and protected-payment calculation instead of continuing an amount based on a superseded evaluation.

VI.ii.2.3.e · Check the combat-related severance exception

The exemption for a disability incurred in a combat zone or combat-related operation depends on the governing date and service findings, including the stated TDRL exception. Do not infer exemption from combat service generally.

VI.ii.2.3.f · Obtain the authoritative combat finding

Use the actual PEB/service documentation to establish the severance disability's combat-zone or combat-operation status. A VIS combat-related indicator alone may not establish the precise statutory exemption.

VI.ii.2.3.g · Protect the non-severance part of the award

Separate the severance and non-severance entitlements before withholding. Read this block with 3.h–i's calculations: its phrasing alone is ambiguous, while the examples require preserving the more advantageous payable result.

VI.ii.2.3.h · Preserve a total non-severance entitlement

The example illustrates why a 100-percent non-severance disability can leave no compensation available for severance recovery. A combined award does not make compensation attributable to unrelated disabilities automatically recoverable.

VI.ii.2.3.i · Use the calculation that pays the Veteran more

Compare compensation payable after withholding the allowable severance-disability amount with compensation based on the non-severance disabilities alone. Pay the more advantageous result and recover only the resulting permissible difference.

VI.ii.2.3.j · Review multiple severance disabilities together

Use the actual evaluations and applicable combined-rating calculation when several disabilities supported severance and their ratings change. Preserve the initial-rating limits and non-severance protections rather than summing isolated percentages.

VI.ii.2.4.a · Check the Air Force VSP schedule's history

The Air Force schedule and exemption changed over time. Identify the actual VSP payment period, including the October 17, 2007–April 29, 2008 exception, before applying the later graduated recovery schedule.

VI.ii.2.4.b · Check when Navy and Marine Corps schedules apply

The Navy/Marine Corps graduated VSP rule depends on the stated initial compensation effective-date threshold of November 2, 2023. Do not apply it to all earlier awards solely because the review occurs now.

VI.ii.2.4.c · Prepare the graduated VSP withholding accurately

Use the applicable 100/75/50-percent schedule bands and preserve the payable remainder, dated rate changes and remaining balance. Drop fractional cents. The source example's 792.0975 should truncate to 792.09; its printed 729.09 is an arithmetic error, not a different rounding rule.

VI.ii.2.4.d · Coordinate VSP recovery with incarceration

Apply the actual incarceration-reduced entitlement and the service's applicable recovery schedule. Separate the Veteran's payable/recoverable amount from any eligible apportionment rather than applying ordinary full-rate withholding during confinement.

VI.ii.2.5.a · Use the correct recoupment start date

For an initial compensation award, apply the actual compensation entitlement/payment rules; for the stated running-award adjustment use LAST PAID and required due process. A discovered payment does not by itself authorize an arbitrary retroactive withholding date.

VI.ii.2.5.b · Explain the recoupment in the actual notice

Tell the Veteran why recovery is required, the verified amount, withholding and payment effect, with appropriate rights and debt information. A generic award letter without the separation-benefit explanation is insufficient.

VI.ii.2.6.a · Refer historical adjustments requiring special processing

Older BDN recovery adjustments can require an Audit Error Worksheet or other special handling. Preserve the actual historical balance and effective rules; do not force a modern award entry to reproduce an unsupported retroactive transaction.

VI.ii.2.6.b · Recalculate recovery after a combined-rating reduction

Use the actual revised compensation and applicable program limit. Where hardship withholding exists, apply its separate protected-payment and threshold rules rather than silently carrying forward the old amount.

VI.ii.2.6.c · Retain an unpaid balance when compensation stops

Stopping compensation does not automatically forgive the recoupment balance; it can remain for future compensation. At the Veteran's death, do not transfer the remaining separation-recovery balance into an unrelated survivor award.

VI.ii.2.7.a · Develop and decide a hardship request properly

Obtain 5655 or equivalent financial information and the required factual review, advisory opinion and approval. Disability severance is excluded from this partial-withholding hardship route; the rating threshold and actual hardship criteria must be met. Approved relief is prospective under the source, not an automatic refund.

VI.ii.2.7.b · Preserve the approved hardship payment correctly

COLA or dependency increases generally flow to the Veteran under the approved arrangement; other increases may increase recovery while preserving the approved net payment. A reduction can change eligibility or the amount; apply the actual rating/payment threshold rather than keeping the former schedule blindly.

VI.ii.2.7.c · Prepare a complete hardship advisory request

Use the source template with the actual benefit, original and remaining balances, evaluations, financial facts, proposed schedule and justification. The template transmits a request for an advisory determination; filling it out is not approval of relief.

VI.iv.2.C.1.a · Verify whether the award is current or legacy

This article expressly applies to both current and legacy apportionments unless a block says otherwise. It defines current awards as first granted effective on or after February 9, 2026 and legacy awards as first granted before that date. D's introductory shorthand is inconsistent; use C's express applicability and the specific branch.

VI.iv.2.C.1.b · A current award changes for entitlement or status, not an increase claim

Current awards already apportion the benefits unavailable to the primary beneficiary during qualifying incarceration/hospitalization. An increase claim is not the mechanism; a real change in primary entitlement or apportionee status may require adjustment.

VI.iv.2.C.1.c · Current temporary apportionments end with confinement or care

A current award ends when the qualifying incarceration or hospitalization ends. The grant notice explains its temporary nature, so another proposed adverse-action notice is not required for that ending. Do not extend or recreate the award after the qualifying condition ceases without a separate lawful basis.

VI.iv.2.C.1.d · A primary award stop also stops its apportionment

If the primary beneficiary's award ends, its associated apportionment ends from the same effective date. The award system ordinarily stops it automatically; verify the actual records and any separately necessary notice or payment reconciliation.

VI.iv.2.C.1.e · Choose the ending rule for the actual event

Death, divorce, child marriage/school/adoption, dependent incarceration, education election, lost dependency, missing payee and listed-country residence each have different adjustment rules. Identify the event before choosing dates or notices. Legacy co-residence and child-support provisions are in D.3.b–c/f–g; some cross-references in this list are stale. Survivor and pension entries do not automatically apply to compensation.

V.iv.2.C.1.f · The reporting person and net payment effect determine notice

The source misprints this heading with V instead of VI. If the primary beneficiary reports only their own status change, adjust the affected awards with contemporaneous notices. If they report the apportionee's change, remove the dependent from the primary award as warranted but first give the apportionee proposed notice and 65 days before stopping apportionment.

If the apportionee reports the change, stop that apportionment; propose any net reduction to the primary beneficiary and allow 65 days, or give contemporaneous notices if the net result increases primary payment. For a third-party primary-status report, propose to the primary and warn apportionees of possible corresponding changes. For a third-party apportionee-status report, propose to the apportionee and to the primary only if the net primary amount falls. New equal-share allocations that reduce an existing apportionee also require notice. Resolve hearing/evidence protections before action.

VI.iv.2.C.1.g · Search for a missing payee before ending the suspended award

Undeliverable apportionment payments suspend payment and proceeds accrue in the payee account. Contact the primary beneficiary and complete the II.i.2.C.6.d address searches. If unsuccessful, end apportionment at the apportionee's LAST PAID DATE, separately decide dependency removal and notify both parties.

If the allotment originated in garnishment, continue withholding even when undeliverable payment is stopped. Enter the amount in OTHER ADJUSTMENTS / ADJUSTMENT AMOUNT; do not release court-ordered funds to the Veteran.

VI.iv.2.C.1.h · Dependency removal is a separate decision from stopping apportionment

Unknown child whereabouts can require removing the child; the spouse-removal rule here concerns pension. A supported legacy dependent need not be removed. Compare the combined effect of stopping apportionment and removing dependency: if payment falls, establish EP 600 and propose removal, asking for address or support evidence and allowing 65 days with hearing protection.

If the response supports retaining the dependent, notify the beneficiary and clear the resolved EP 600. Otherwise remove from the primary award's own LAST PAID DATE with proper notice. The primary beneficiary supplying an address alone does not resume apportionment; the apportionee must request resumption.

VI.iv.2.C.1.i · A suspended award and a discontinued award resume differently

On the apportionee's request, resume a still-suspended apportionment under EP 130 and release its proceeds. After discontinuance, obtain a new 21-0788 and apply current eligibility rather than automatically restoring legacy payment. A garnishment-origin payment has a separate exception: resume from LAST PAID DATE regardless of when the request arrived.

VI.iv.2.C.2.a · The spouse apportionment ends the month after divorce

End the spouse-apportionee's award on the first day of the month after divorce becomes final or an annulment decree issues. Verify the decree and complete the applicable notice procedure; the primary dependency adjustment has its own rule.

VI.iv.2.C.2.b · Protect the spouse-apportionee's chance to dispute the decree

When someone other than the apportionee reports divorce/annulment, give the apportionee proposed notice with 60 days to contest validity. Include court, date and file number if supplied. Propose primary dependency removal too unless the Veteran reported it; a Veteran report permits primary removal while the apportionee's notice remains pending.

VI.iv.2.C.2.c · A disputed divorce needs documentary follow-up

If the apportionee disputes divorce and no decree is of record, ask the Veteran for documentary evidence with 30 days to respond, then request a certified decree from the state vital-record custodian if needed. If none can be located, continue apportionment and explain the result. A spouse removed after the Veteran's report is not added back without the Veteran's prescribed-form request.

VI.iv.2.C.2.d · Questionable decree validity requires legal review

Ask District Counsel for a legal opinion before changing either award when decree validity is questionable. Notify both parties of the pending review; the expiration of a response period does not resolve a legal defect.

VII.iii.1.B.2.e · Stop the former spouse's entire apportionment after proper review

The source mislabels this C.2.e heading as VII.iii.1.B.2.e. After the required response opportunity and supported decision, stop the apportionment, separately adjust the primary dependency award and notify each party. Stop the former spouse's apportionment even if children were included; their later apportionment requires a new claim under current rules.

VI.iv.2.C.3.a · Confirmed primary death stops running apportionments

The first-notice-of-death action stopping the Veteran's award also stops its apportionments. A later posthumous apportionee adjustment does not need a companion primary award unless an adjustment there is independently required; reconcile possible one-time payments.

VI.iv.2.C.3.b · Verify death and use separate apportionee and primary dates

A primary beneficiary's death report permits removing the dependent from the primary award the month after death, but obtain a certificate before ending the apportionment. Request the certificate with the specified 30-day opportunity when appropriate, then seek a certified state record. A third-party report requires proposed primary removal with 65-day processing protection; evaluate any assertion that the apportionee is alive.

Without a certificate after custodian development, apply the source's continuation rule and any prescribed-form requirement to restore dependency. Once death is established, stop a running apportionment the first day of the death month; if already stopped/suspended, use the earlier of that date and LAST PAID DATE. Reconcile current equal-share reallocations or unchanged remaining legacy awards and notify affected parties.

VI.iv.2.C.3.c · Example: the two death adjustments are one month apart

If a compensation spouse-apportionee dies in October, stop that apportionment October 1. The Veteran's spouse allowance continues through October, with removal November 1. Using the same effective date for both awards would be incorrect in this example.

VI.iv.2.C.4.a · A primary beneficiary's child-relationship dispute needs evidence and notice

Establish EP 130 for the primary and EP 600 for the child-apportionee, develop missing relationship evidence and propose to the child/custodian. After the 65-day processing opportunity and actual evidence review, keep both awards if the child qualifies; otherwise use the specified primary/child EP actions and notify both parties.

The proposal describes the month after the 60-day due-process period, but the final steps use LAST PAID DATE. Reconcile the actual proposed/final dates and any further notice before action instead of silently choosing a date. A bare denial of parentage is not automatically sufficient evidence.

VI.iv.2.C.4.b · A child or custodian's report reverses the order of protections

On the child's/custodian's report, control under child EP 130, request needed evidence and stop that apportionment at LAST PAID DATE with notice. Establish primary EP 600 and propose removing the child from that date. After 65 days and evidence review, keep the child if qualifying; resume apportionment from the prior stop only if current regulations permit it. Otherwise remove the child and provide required notices.

VI.iv.2.C.5.a · Entering active duty does not end an existing child apportionment

For decisions on or after February 9, 2026, continue an existing apportionment when the child enters active duty, whether the award is current or legacy. The prior discontinuance policy was different. A new claim for a child already on active duty is a separate rule; the source's claim-decision wording also differs from A's receipt wording, so verify timing if service begins while a new claim is pending.

VI.iv.2.C.6.a · The primary dependency date usually follows the month of the event

Most dependency removals from the primary award use the separate end-of-month rule. Review the specific divorce, death, marriage and school provisions instead of copying an apportionment ending date into the primary award.

VI.iv.2.C.6.b · Child status and payment configuration change the ending date

For a sole child-apportionee, death or marriage ends apportionment at the start of the event month while primary dependency ends the following month. Adoption-out on or after February 9, 2026 uses apportionment LAST PAID DATE and a separate primary adoption rule. School ending normally uses the next month; failure to return after a paid vacation uses the earlier of LAST PAID DATE and the month after the scheduled return.

If the child is included on a spouse-apportionee award, reduce that award the month after death/marriage/school ending, subject to school exceptions; adoption-out uses LAST PAID DATE. The separate death-verification procedure still applies.

VI.iv.2.C.6.c · Reconcile each remaining apportionee after one loses status

For multiple apportionees, school cases use the school-ending dates; other status losses use the specified first-of-event-month allotment date and a separate primary dependency date. Apply the specific divorce or death instructions where directed. An adoption case can present tension with C.6.b's specific LAST PAID DATE rule; resolve that before authorizing an inconsistent date.

Remaining legacy shares continue unchanged. Where warranted, equally reallocate the benefits unavailable to the primary beneficiary among remaining current-rule apportionees. Update ALLOTMENT DECISION and dependency entries, generate the award, route for authorization and notify the affected parties.

VI.iv.2.D.1.a · Use this article for legacy awards

D concerns legacy apportionments authorized before February 9, 2026. Its note about C's applicability is inconsistent with C.1.a, which expressly covers both current and legacy awards except where stated. Use each specific provision rather than excluding current awards from all C procedures.

VI.iv.2.D.1.b · Preserve existing status while the original conditions continue

Legacy awards stay in their existing status after the February 9, 2026 regulatory change until their supporting conditions cease. Increase claims are no longer provided for, but primary entitlement or dependent status changes can still require an adjustment under the applicable rule. COLA has separate instructions.

VI.iv.2.D.1.c · Distinguish a barred increase from a new claim

Deny a clearly identified legacy increase without unnecessary development as a matter of law and explain the current hospitalization/incarceration bases. A new dependent is a new claim, not an increase or adjustment. If it is unclear that an increase was requested, accept a new claim under current rules instead of using the barred-increase shortcut.

VI.iv.2.D.1.d · An election of the current provision cannot restore the old award later

A legacy apportionee can apply for a qualifying current incarceration/hospitalization apportionment, possibly yielding more during that period. Once elected, the legacy award cannot be reinstated when the temporary current award ends. Establish the actual informed election and new entitlement.

VI.iv.2.D.2.a · Read the original regulation to know what must continue

Historical 3.450 generally required separate residence and lack of reasonable support. Historical 3.451 considered claimant hardship and absence of undue hardship to the primary/other dependents, with actual income, resources and special needs. Other historical pension/incarceration bases have distinct criteria. Evaluate the original decision before deciding its conditions ended.

VI.iv.2.D.2.b · The historical amount rules explain the existing award

Historical regulations differed on amounts, including the ordinary 20–50 percent 3.451 framework for compensation. Survivor and pension provisions and A&A exclusions differ. These historical descriptions explain a legacy award; they do not reopen authority to grant a present increase based on the same former need criteria.

VI.iv.2.D.2.c · A nominal share may not be a reasonable amount

The historical reasonable-amount rule disallowed a share too small to meaningfully help the apportionee. Apply that rule to the actual authorized maintenance question, not as an arbitrary minimum invented by the tool.

VI.iv.2.D.3.a · A primary stop or unsupported reduced rate can end legacy payment

End the legacy apportionment when the primary award ends or the reduced rate cannot support a reasonable amount, including applicable historical 3.451 undue hardship. Use the same date as the primary stop/reduction. Before ending for undue hardship, consider whether qualifying current incarceration/institutional eligibility supports a new award.

VI.iv.2.D.3.b · Verify reported co-residence and protect the apportionee's response

If the primary beneficiary reports living together, propose discontinuance to the apportionee and allow the stated 65-day processing opportunity. Evidence such as a lease or utility bill can establish continued separate residence and preserve the award. An apportionee's own co-residence report skips that proposal step. When ending is warranted, use LAST PAID DATE and notify both parties.

VI.iv.2.D.3.c · A primary request alone does not justify termination

A primary beneficiary can request discontinuance, but evidence must show the original supporting circumstances ended. Give proposed adverse-action notice to the apportionee before stopping payment and complete the actual decision notices and contested review rights.

VI.iv.2.D.3.d · Avoid paying the same retroactive allowance twice

When a primary increase reaches back before dependent status ended, pay the increase, including the applicable dependent allowance, to the primary beneficiary. Exclude the amounts already allocated to the apportionee through the end of the month dependent status ended.

VI.iv.2.D.3.e · Legacy out-of-custody DIC children have special rules

The historical DIC child allocation did not require the ordinary need development, proposal or administrative decision. Death or marriage of that child did not produce a corresponding surviving-spouse award adjustment or an extra end-of-month child allowance. This is a survivor rule and must not replace compensation child procedures.

VI.iv.2.D.3.f · Actual child-support payment can end a historical non-support award

For a legacy award based on historical 3.450 non-support, obtain objective evidence of actual child-support payments. A primary beneficiary's evidence requires a proposal to the apportionee; the custodian's own supporting report does not. When warranted, end from the date the primary beneficiary actually began paying support, not simply the court-order date.

VI.iv.2.D.3.g · Preserve other legacy shares and recalculate current shares only as warranted

End the child's allotment from the actual support-payment start. Other legacy apportionments continue unchanged; remaining current-rule awards can require equal reallocation of benefits unavailable to the primary during qualifying confinement/care. Update the actual allotments, generate the award, obtain authorization and notify affected parties.

X.i.3.B.1.a · Distinguish listed-country payment restrictions from ordinary foreign residence

The reviewed manual and 31 CFR 211.1 identify Cuba and North Korea for this payment-delivery restriction. Check the current authority before a real payment action. The manual's exception requires the claimant's own request for personal delivery at a specified U.S. Foreign Service post in an unlisted country; another person's address is not the same exception.

X.i.3.B.1.b · Verify apportionment eligibility and keep an annual existence diary

Apply current VI.iv.2.A eligibility before using this older apportionment language; foreign residence alone does not restore new need-based apportionments after February 9, 2026. For an authorized payment, confirm the primary beneficiary is living annually and reset the diary when confirmed. Noncitizen claimants in listed countries retain B.2 restrictions.

If existence cannot be established after a year, propose discontinuance to the apportionee unless the apportionee supplied that information. Allow the stated 65-day processing opportunity and resolve evidence/hearing protection. The proposal step describes the month after 60 days, while the final step uses LAST PAID DATE; reconcile any adverse-date difference and required notice before action, then notify the apportionee.

X.i.3.B.1.c · Correspondence may still be sent

The payment restriction does not prohibit correspondence to a claimant in a listed country, although delivery may be unreliable. In correspondence outside VA, use listed countries rather than the source's discouraged alternative term.

X.i.3.B.1.d · Identify the special withheld-checks account

The Treasury account for proceeds of withheld foreign checks preserves the rights of specified earlier award recipients and beneficiaries who later moved to a listed country. Determine whether funds were actually deposited there; not every foreign payment stop is a special-account deposit.

X.i.3.B.2.a · The development restriction depends on citizenship and delivery facts

For a non-U.S. citizen residing in a listed country, do not develop an initial/supplemental claim or authorize the corresponding award unless the claimant independently requests personal delivery at a specified Foreign Service post in an unlisted country. In countries without State offices, development is limited to direct claimant correspondence.

X.i.3.B.2.b · Document the actual basis for denial without development

Under 3.653(c), the listed-country noncitizen claim can be denied without development when the required post-delivery request is absent or full development needs unavailable State services. Do not extend this restriction to every foreign claimant or assume services are unavailable without checking the actual case.

X.i.3.B.3.a · A Treasury return code is not itself proof of death

Treasury returns covered payments for cancellation when the beneficiary lives in a listed country. The described Form 20-6560 message 611 has a death-related label; establish the actual return reason instead of recording death solely from that label.

X.i.3.B.3.b · Reconcile regular payments and retroactive adjustments separately

For a regular monthly return with no earlier-period adjustments, discontinue from the actual LAST PAID DATE. If the returned payment includes earlier adjustments, adjust/reduce and discontinue so those retroactive adjustments are canceled correctly.

X.i.3.B.3.c · Adjust affected dependent rates without inventing a death finding

When the listed-country primary stop affects another person's rate, process the B.3.c as-if-deceased rate adjustment under EP 130 from the discontinued award's LAST PAID DATE. Annotate Payee residing in a listed country, using OTHER PRINT REMARKS in VBMS. This payment rule does not establish actual death.

X.i.3.B.3.d · A dependent's listed-country residence can affect the primary award

When a beneficiary in an unlisted country receives additional benefits for a dependent in a listed country, remove that dependent from the award at the actual LAST PAID DATE. Give proposed adverse-action notice first unless the beneficiary reported the residence change.

X.i.3.B.4.a · Establish a qualifying release condition

Payment release or resumption can be reconsidered when the country is removed from the list, the beneficiary establishes residence in an unlisted country, or the required Foreign Service post delivery request is made. Renewed contact alone is not a release condition.

X.i.3.B.4.b · Claim the special-account funds and prove continued entitlement

Release identified withheld-checks funds on a claim and any required loyalty clearance. There is no time limit simply to file the claim, but continued-entitlement evidence must arrive within one year of its request. The source identifies the Compensation and Pension appropriation for payment; accrued cases use separate rules.

X.i.3.B.4.c · A listed-country stop can resume from discontinuance

For a stop because VA could not obtain necessary evidence or because the payee lived in a listed country, the otherwise payable amount can resume from discontinuance if entitlement throughout the gap is proved. The claim itself has no filing limit, but the requested continued-entitlement evidence has a one-year requirement.

X.i.3.B.4.d · An existence-only stop has a different date rule

When payment stopped solely because continued existence was unestablished, use 3.158(c) and 3.114(a), with no date before December 1, 1962. Do not automatically copy the original discontinuance date from the separate listed-country resumption rule.

X.i.3.B.4.e · Develop identity and entitlement for every intervening period

Before releasing or resuming, establish identity and actual eligibility, including any required loyalty clearance. Identity must be acceptable to the relevant State authorities where applicable. Pension and death-benefit election opportunities are separate from compensation and must not be silently omitted in those benefit cases.

X.i.3.B.4.f · Separate the retroactive release from recurring payment

Prepare a one-time payment for the verified retroactive portion and a normal award resuming payment from the final date through which payment was withheld. Reconcile the periods so the same month is not paid twice.

X.i.3.B.4.g · Check death and accrued-claim facts before advising Finance

The source directs notice to Finance that withheld funds are not payable to a living person when death is shown and no accrued claim was filed within one year. Verify the actual death, claim timing and applicable accrued authority first; this is not an automatic release to a relative.

X.i.3.B.5.a · Do not infer enemy-territory status from military conflict

The distinct 3.653(a) rule concerns a non-U.S. citizen in enemy-controlled territory. The reviewed manual says no territory currently qualifies. U.S. troops, military engagements or NATO/UN presence alone do not establish the rule. A documented applicable stop uses LAST PAID DATE; any claimed new authority requires verification.

X.i.3.B.5.b · The historical dependent payment is not an ordinary apportionment

Following an actual 3.653(a) stop, a dependent may claim the distinct benefit using 21-0788, subject to citizenship/residence restrictions. Establish the former beneficiary is living and continued compensation entitlement unless all disabilities are static. Payment cannot exceed the rate for the same dependent class if the primary beneficiary were deceased.

Keep annual existence controls. If existence becomes unestablished, wait until a year since the last confirmation, then apply the dependent-report exception or proposed notice and 65-day processing opportunity. Resolve hearing/evidence rights and the source's proposed-date versus final LAST PAID DATE discrepancy before discontinuance and notice.

X.i.3.B.5.c · Reconsideration after the historical stop requires a supplemental claim

The former beneficiary must file a supplemental claim and provide credible evidence against mutiny, treason, sabotage or assistance-to-enemy disqualification. The resulting award cannot precede receipt of that supplemental claim; this differs from listed-country resumption.

X.i.3.B.6.a · Identify an actual statutory clearance requirement

Loyalty clearance is required for the stated treasonable-act forfeiture situation under 3.902(d) or alien-payment situation under 3.653(b). Do not request it merely because a record is foreign.

X.i.3.B.6.b · Former enemy-territory residence alone usually is insufficient

Outside Philippine cases, do not routinely seek clearance solely for World War II residence in former enemy-controlled territory. There must be evidence that the claimant assisted, or was positioned to assist, an enemy. Philippine cases follow their specific screening procedure.

X.i.3.B.6.c · Check the residence-based clearance exceptions

The listed exceptions concern age under 18 when hostilities ended, a child paid through a custodial surviving spouse, qualifying continuing State residence after Guam occupation, later U.S. citizenship and entry only after hostilities ended. Obtain naturalization proof where applicable; absent contrary evidence it supports presumed loyalty. Resolve any independent statutory/adverse-evidence issue separately.

X.i.3.B.6.d · Use the territory's actual historical end date

For the age/residence screen, hostilities ended May 13, 1943 in North Africa; August 17, 1943 in Sicily; May 7, 1945 in continental Europe and the Middle East; and July 4, 1945 in Japanese-occupied areas. These dates serve this specific historical clearance rule.

X.i.3.B.6.e · Obtain the identifying and residence history for a required clearance

For a non-Philippine original claim requiring clearance, collect every used name, birth date/place, marriage dates/places, former and current nationality, and foreign addresses with residence dates. Keep claimant identifiers in the authorized claim record and request.

X.i.3.B.6.f · Request the specified evidence from State

Ask the Office of Special Consular Services for evidence concerning offenses under 38 U.S.C. 6104 and relevant Fascist/Nazi membership, including whether and when membership ended. The request supports the required determination; the guide does not make a forfeiture finding.

X.i.3.B.6.g · Use the Philippine form and Army records

When a Philippine clearance is required, obtain Form 21-4169 and use Department of the Army Counterintelligence Corps and other records. A report of no derogatory information supports presumed innocence for adjudication until contrary evidence is received.

X.i.3.B.6.h · Control an existing investigation without duplicating it

If State has already begun the relevant 6104 investigation, do not submit another specific investigation request. Establish a local control to obtain and review its report.

X.i.3.B.7.a · State normally provides consular help without cost

Consular services and foreign investigations are generally provided without cost to VA. State advises VA if an expense will be incurred; handle any actual expense through the authorized channel.

X.i.3.B.7.b · Request the specific consular service the claim needs

Consular officers can assist with applications, school approval, evidence development, oaths, authorized guardianship matters and examination arrangements. Use the responsible foreign-claims office and request the actual missing service, not a generic investigation.

X.i.3.B.8.a · An official foreign signature may need authentication

Unless a listed exception applies, an affidavit or document executed by or before a foreign official needs that official's signature authenticated by the U.S. consular officer with jurisdiction or by State. Evaluate the exception facts first.

X.i.3.B.8.b · Several signed and sealed records need no extra authentication

Exceptions include documents submitted/approved by the specified VAC official; an authorized general-oath officer's signature and seal; execution before an authorized VA employee abroad; and public/church birth, marriage, divorce or death copies bearing the custodian's signature/seal with no reason to doubt correctness. Authentication and translation are separate questions.

X.i.3.B.8.c · Designated offices request authentication directly

Pittsburgh RO and Philadelphia PMC send authentication requests directly to the appropriate embassy/consulate; Canadian documents go to VAC. The block also contains older blanket foreign-jurisdiction notes. Current X.i.3.A provides the specific compensation, Philippine and other routing distinctions; do not transfer a case solely on the older note.

X.i.3.B.8.d · Other ROs route a signed request through BAS

Prepare the request for VSCM signature, digitize it and the document, and send it through the authorized VA channel to BAS at VAVBAWAS/CO/OUTREACH. BAS forwards the authentication request to the appropriate Foreign Service post.

X.i.3.B.8.e · Tell the claimant when acceptable documentation is still needed

If BAS cannot obtain authentication, return the document and explain that acceptable documentation is needed before VA can act further under this provision. Preserve the actual development control; inability to authenticate does not itself prove fraud.

X.i.3.B.9.a · Use a qualified translator and retain the evidence control

Refer non-English letters, medical evidence, lay statements or SSA documents to a Director/VSCM-qualified employee or approved company. An employee signs and dates a written accuracy certification. For a company request, copy the documents, annotate the file and set the claim-level translation suspense. A learning summary does not replace an evidence translation.

X.i.3.B.9.b · Pittsburgh can arrange translation when local resources are unavailable

Mark each VBMS document Needs Translated. Send an encrypted request to ssd.vbapit@va.gov with subject Documents in Need of Translation and the Veteran/claim identifiers, language, count, exact document names/receipt dates and priority need. Keep that information in the authorized VA channel.

The source's normal 10-day processing estimate is not a claimant deadline or authority to close for nonresponse. Priority timing varies. Pittsburgh uploads completed translations and marks the tracked item received; review the returned material and retain controls for omissions or further development.

VIII.iv.6.C.1.a · Check whether both payments cover the same injury

The duplicate-benefit rule concerns money or property received to settle a legal claim for the same injury or death for which 1151 benefits are claimed. Identify the actual covered injury and recipient; death claims have their separate survivor rules.

VIII.iv.6.C.1.b · A civil recovery and a VA claim can proceed separately

A Veteran may seek damages from the United States through trial or a settlement/compromise. A settlement exchanges the right to sue for an agreed payment. Establish the real legal recovery rather than inferring it from a claim being filed.

VIII.iv.6.C.1.c · The label on the recovery does not decide offset

For this rule, a judgment includes a settlement, compromise, administrative award or tort award. Review the substance and finality of the recovery regardless of its title.

VIII.iv.6.C.1.d · Use the gross recovery, not the amount after fees

Economic losses and noneconomic losses such as pain and suffering are both covered. Attorney fees, contracts and other recovery expenses are not deducted from the amount subject to the applicable offset.

VIII.iv.6.C.1.e · The designated legal activity resolves the tort claim

Depending on the case, General Counsel, the U.S. Attorney General or District Counsel resolves the claim against the government. Claims authorization does not negotiate or determine that recovery.

VIII.iv.6.C.1.f · Obtain the legal result through the proper channel

When the tort claim is resolved favorably, District Counsel supplies the result to the VSCM at the RO with claims-folder jurisdiction. Associate the actual legal documents before determining an offset.

VIII.iv.6.C.2.a · A filed lawsuit alone does not justify delaying the award

Do not defer an award merely because a tort claim was filed. Defer the affected award when there is reason to believe the tort claim has become final and needed facts are unresolved. A required 1151 offset starts the month after finality.

VIII.iv.6.C.2.b · Pension treats the proceeds as income instead

No 1151 compensation offset is taken when pension is paid or elected instead of 1151 compensation. Net settlement proceeds can be countable pension income. Give proposed adverse-action notice before the pension adjustment unless the Veteran supplied the information and understands its payment effect.

VIII.iv.6.C.2.c · Pre-December 1962 recoveries use different rules

An administrative award or settlement final before December 1, 1962 bars further 1151 compensation. A court judgment from that period does not bar or offset payment unless its terms do. If payment improperly continued despite the administrative bar, stop/reduce from the first month after the month last paid under 3.500(b)(2). Claims received before October 1, 1997 also require the applicable historical 3.800 rule.

VIII.iv.6.C.2.d · Have legal counsel allocate a multiple-person recovery

When a judgment covers two or more people, determine each person's actual allocation. At an RO, the VSCM asks District Counsel to decide the distribution; under Central Office jurisdiction, General Counsel does so. Do not assume equal shares.

VIII.iv.6.C.3.a · Protect compensation payable without 1151

Withholding cannot take compensation the Veteran would receive if no 1151 claim had been filed. No offset applies when the 1151 disability adds no payable compensation, or when compensation for that particular disability is independently payable without 1151.

VIII.iv.6.C.3.b · Survivor recovery depends on the state's legal basis

Under the FTCA, state law can distinguish estate survival damages from wrongful-death damages paid for survivors. Estate survival recoveries are not offset against DIC; survivor wrongful-death recoveries may be. Obtain the actual legal distribution and state-law determination instead of applying the Veteran compensation calculation.

VIII.iv.6.C.3.c · Both economic and noneconomic damages can be offset

The full damages recovered by an individual under the FTCA are subject to that individual's applicable 1151 offset, whether they compensate financial loss or pain and suffering. Apply the separate protected-compensation and allocation rules as well.

VIII.iv.6.C.3.d · Recalculate the difference when SC compensation changes

Compare compensation for all disabilities with the amount payable for service-connected disabilities alone. Withhold only the difference. When the two amounts become equal, discontinue the existing offset; the numbered example in 3.h explains this even if the total combined evaluation did not change.

VIII.iv.6.C.3.e · Establish when the judgment actually became final

A VA administrative award is final on approval. An Attorney General agreement after a suit is final when the court approves it, even if dismissal follows later. Begin offset the first of the next month; ask District Counsel to resolve any uncertain finality date.

VIII.iv.6.C.3.f · Protect periods before finality and distinguish debt waiver

Do not offset compensation for periods before the month after the judgment or settlement became final. A waived or invalid accounts-receivable debt is not money actually recovered and does not reduce the remaining amount to offset from future benefits.

VIII.iv.6.C.3.g · Example: an earlier compensation date stays protected

When a judgment is final June 15, 2024 and compensation is later awarded from March 16, offset cannot reach the March-through-June period. The first possible offset date is July 1, 2024.

VIII.iv.6.C.3.h · An unchanged total evaluation can still end withholding

If all disabilities produce a 90-percent payable rate but SC disabilities alone produce 80 percent, offset the difference. If an SC increase makes the SC-only rate 90 percent, end withholding even though the combined rate remains 90 percent. A later decrease can make withholding resume.

VIII.iv.6.C.3.i · An independently SC injury does not require this offset

The example involves an SC foot disability aggravated during VA care. Because that disability remains compensable independently of 1151, damages recovered for the treatment injury do not create a 1151 offset against that independently payable compensation.

VIII.iv.6.C.3.j · Check an actual secondary-service-connection award

If steroid treatment for an SC pulmonary condition causes cataracts and rating awards secondary service connection under 3.310, no 1151 offset is required for the cataracts. Authorization uses the approved entitlement basis; it does not decide secondary service connection.

VIII.iv.6.C.4.a · Use the award-preparation rules with these specific exceptions

The general award-preparation procedures for readjustment and disability severance pay also inform 1151 award preparation. This article supplies the specific tort-offset rules; do not import a separation-pay exception that does not apply to tort recovery.

VIII.iv.6.C.4.b · Enter the verified Tort balance and effective date

In RECORD DECISIONS / AWARD ADJUSTMENTS / DISABILITY PAY, add a Tort payment entry, the verified recoverable ORIGINAL BALANCE and AWARD EFFECTIVE DATE. Accept the entry and finish the decision grid. Check the generated award against the documented protected-rate calculation and actual prior recovery.

VIII.iv.6.C.4.c · Ancillary benefits have distinct eligibility limits

An otherwise eligible 1151 Veteran may receive clothing allowance, automobile/adaptive equipment or adapted housing. DEA, VR&E and CHAMPVA require an independent qualifying basis. A settlement allocating damages for housing or automobile benefits also needs the separate 3.362(e) offset review; compensation entitlement does not settle every ancillary issue.

VIII.iv.6.C.5.a · Call it compensation under 1151 in the notice

Use compensation under 38 U.S.C. 1151 rather than service connection when describing this entitlement. Include the required decision-notice elements for any denial and the actual award explanation; do not imply that an as-if-SC award is an SC determination.