Source: https://veteranclaims.net/2009/04/12/fedcir-applicant-for-benefits-and-due-process-protection-mansfield-v-peake-no-2007-7282/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 13:02:36+00:00

Document:
Cook v. Principi, 318 F.3d 1334, 1352-53 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (en banc) (Gajarsa, J., dissenting) (arguing that an applicant for veterans’ benefits possesses a property interest of sufficient magnitude to invoke the protection of due process).
Informal claims for section 1151 benefits, however, are processed differently.
The VA still takes the first step of determining whether an “informal claim” has been filed under the standard set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.154, discussed above. However, 38 C.F.R. § 3.150(c)-titled “Forms to be furnished”-provides that the VA will not commence the second step of forwarding a formal application form to the veteran for completion, where the veteran is applying for section 1151 benefits. Thus, while the veteran is not required to submit a “specific application” for section 1151 benefits, 38 C.F.R. § 3.150(c), the veteran’s submission must nevertheless satisfy the standard for an “informal claim” set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.154.
VA may accept as a claim for benefits under 38 U.S.C. 1151 . . . any communication in writing indicating an intent to file a claim for disability compensation . . . under the laws governing entitlement to veterans’ benefits for disability or death due to VA hospital care, medical or surgical treatment, examination, training and rehabilitation services, or compensated work therapy program, whether such communication is contained in a formal claim . . . or in any other document.
38 C.F.R. § 3.154 (2004) (emphasis added).
Generally, an informal claim for VA benefits is processed in two steps. First, the VA determines whether the veteran’s submission satisfies the standard for an informal claim-i.e., whether the communication “indicat[es] an intent to apply for one or more benefits under the laws administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs.” 38 C.F.R. § 3.155(a) (1990). Second, upon receipt of an informal claim, the VA forwards a formal application form to the veteran. Id. If the veteran subsequently submits the form within one year, the veteran’s formal claim will be deemed to have been received as of the date of receipt of the informal claim. Id.
Robert P. Walsh, of Battle Creek, Michigan, argued for claimant-appellant.
United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee.
General; Jeanne E. Davidson, Director; and Martin F. Hockey, Jr., Assistant Director.
United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC.
Veterans’ Appeals (“Board”) that June 11, 1993 is the earliest effective date for Mr.
Mansfield’s award of Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) benefits under 38 U.S.C.
basis for an earlier effective date, we affirm.
District of Michigan, seeking a combined total recovery of $750,000 under the FTCA.
dismissed the case with prejudice on February 17, 1993.
under 38 U.S.C. § 1151. . . .
VA medical facilities shall be compensated as if their disabilities are service-connected.
effective date of his award is the date on which his “claim” for VA benefits was received.
See 38 U.S.C. §§ 5110(a), (c) (2000); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(i) (2007); accord 38 U.S.C.
§§ 3010(a), (c) (1988); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(i) (1990).
be accepted as a claim.
by the Board reflects the language in effect during the relevant time period in this case.
Veterans Court affirmed. The court agreed with the Board’s conclusion that Mr.
1599726, at *3. The court disagreed, however, with the Board’s determination that Mr.
over the appeal pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7292.
despite the Director’s instruction to do so, amounted to a denial of due process.
Our authority to review decisions of the Veterans Court is governed by statute.
address each of these, in turn.
forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.150(c).
to veterans’ benefits for disability or death due to VA hospital care . . . .” 38 C.F.R.
veteran’s intent to pursue a claim under the FTCA.
requirements for “claims” for veterans’ benefits.
individual under the laws administered by the Secretary.
amended on August 3, 2004.
may  be accepted as a claim.
the following reasons, we do not think that was the case.
even where it otherwise meets the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 3.154. See Stewart v.
to veterans’ benefits.’” Appellee’s Br. 20 (emphasis added).
FTCA allows claimants to pursue adversarial tort claims against the government.
governed by the non-adversarial procedures that apply to claims for veterans’ benefits.
Veterans Affairs Remarks Accompanying 2004 Revision of Section 3.154, 69 Fed. Reg.
Act should routinely be construed by VA as a claim for benefits under 38 U.S.C. 1151 . . . . Accordingly, we believe it is appropriate to provide that a claim will be construed as a claim for benefits under 38 U.S.C. 1151 . . .
only if the veteran intended to seek those benefits as distinguished from monetary damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act.Id. These statements by the VA are consistent with our interpretation of the prior version of 38 C.F.R. § 3.154.
We do not agree with Mr. Mansfield that 38 C.F.R. § 3.150(c), which provides that “a specific application for benefits will not be initiated,” compels a different result.
claim—i.e., whether the communication “indicat[es] an intent to apply for one or more benefits under the laws administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs.” 38 C.F.R. § 3.155(a) (1990). Second, upon receipt of an informal claim, the VA forwards a formal application form to the veteran. Id. If the veteran subsequently submits the form within one year, the veteran’s formal claim will be deemed to have been received as of the date of receipt of the informal claim. Id.
an “informal claim” set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.154.
his wife, seeking $250,000 for “a loss of services and consortium.” The claim in Mr.
of course, do not reach this question.
concerns his entitlement to benefits for the period of January 3, 1991 to June 11, 1993.
Board’s decision establishing June 11, 1993 as the earliest effective date for Mr.
Mansfield’s disability benefits under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is affirmed.
informed by his physician—that he could submit a claim for section 1151 benefits.
Thereafter, he filed his Form 21-4138 on October 5, 2000.

References: v. 
 § 3
 § 3
 § 3
 § 3
 § 3
 § 3
 § 1151
 § 3
 § 3
 § 7292
 § 3
 § 3
 v.

 § 3
 § 3
 § 3
 § 3
 § 1151