Recently Changed
Regulation, case law, and agency precedent updates that shape VA disability claims.
- PendingCFR Part 4
Sleep apnea — proposed tightening of CPAP-based ratings
VA proposed restructuring sleep apnea ratings so that the use of a CPAP machine would no longer automatically warrant a 50% evaluation. New criteria would require documented persistent symptoms despite treatment for higher tiers. Final rule has not been issued; existing ratings would be protected if and when finalized.
View in tracker - Feb 7, 2025CFR Part 4
Comprehensive revision of the Mental Disorders rating schedule
VA replaced the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders with a new evaluation framework based on five domains of functioning (cognition, interpersonal interactions, task performance, navigation, and self-care). Eliminated the 0% rating; minimum compensable evaluation is now 10%. Diagnostic codes consolidated and updated to align with DSM-5-TR.
View in tracker - Apr 19, 2024CFR Part 4
Tinnitus reclassified as a symptom — proposed end of separate 10% rating
VA proposed to remove the standalone 10% evaluation for tinnitus under DC 6260 and instead treat tinnitus as a symptom of an underlying disease (e.g., Meniere's, hearing loss). Public outcry and Congressional pushback delayed implementation; existing ratings would be protected.
View in tracker - Aug 10, 2022CFR Part 4
PACT Act expanded presumptive conditions for toxic exposures
Honoring our PACT Act of 2022 added 23+ presumptive conditions for veterans exposed to burn pits and other airborne hazards in the Gulf War, post-9/11, and Vietnam eras. Includes hypertension as an Agent Orange presumptive and several rare cancers.
View in tracker - Oct 1, 2021CFR Part 4
Asthma and COPD — modernized pulmonary function testing criteria
VA updated the rating criteria for asthma (DC 6602) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (DC 6604) to reflect modern pulmonary function testing standards (FEV-1, FEV-1/FVC ratio) and current treatment regimens including biologic therapy.
View in tracker - Feb 7, 2021CFR Part 4
Musculoskeletal system — updated joint and muscle injury criteria
VA modernized the musculoskeletal rating schedule to incorporate current clinical practice for joint replacement, muscle injury severity, and revised range-of-motion criteria. Includes updated diagnostic codes for shoulder, hip, and knee replacements.
View in tracker - 2019CAVC Case Law
Kisor v. Wilkie — 139 S. Ct. 2400 (2019)
Limited Auer deference: courts defer to an agency's interpretation of its own regulation only when the regulation is genuinely ambiguous and the interpretation is reasonable.
View in tracker - 2019CAVC Case Law
Procopio v. Wilkie — 913 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (en banc)
Blue Water Navy veterans who served within the 12-nautical-mile territorial sea of Vietnam are entitled to the Agent Orange presumption of exposure.
View in tracker - 2018CAVC Case Law
Saunders v. Wilkie — 886 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2018)
Pain alone, without an underlying diagnosed condition, can constitute a 'disability' under 38 U.S.C. § 1110 if it reaches a level of functional impairment of earning capacity.
View in tracker - Dec 9, 2018CFR Part 4
Hematologic and lymphatic systems — comprehensive revision
Added or revised diagnostic codes for sickle cell disease, multiple myeloma, polycythemia vera, primary myelofibrosis, and other rare blood disorders. Modernized treatment-response criteria.
View in tracker - Aug 13, 2018CFR Part 4
Skin disorders — updated criteria for scars and dermatologic conditions
VA revised diagnostic codes 7800-7833 to clarify scar measurement, treatment-frequency thresholds for chronic conditions like eczema and psoriasis, and added codes for newer conditions including hidradenitis suppurativa.
View in tracker - Aug 11, 2018CFR Part 4
Visual impairment — updated criteria and table for visual acuity loss
Revised the table of ratings for impairment of central visual acuity and field of vision. Added or refined codes for diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma, and post-refractive surgery complications.
View in tracker - 2017CAVC Case Law
Sharp v. Shulkin — 29 Vet. App. 26 (2017)
When a flare-up is not observed during the exam, the examiner must elicit information from the veteran and other sources to estimate functional loss during flares — and explain if estimation is impossible.
View in tracker - Dec 10, 2017CFR Part 4
Endocrine system — diabetes, thyroid, and adrenal disorder updates
Modernized criteria for diabetes mellitus (DC 7913), hyperthyroidism, hypothyroidism, and adrenal disorders. Updated to current insulin-pump and continuous-glucose-monitoring practice.
View in tracker - 2016CAVC Case Law
Correia v. McDonald — 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016)
Joint exams must include range of motion testing in active motion, passive motion, and in weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing positions where applicable, per 38 C.F.R. § 4.59.
View in tracker - 2014GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 3-2014 — Same-sex marriage and survivor benefits
Following United States v. Windsor (2013), same-sex spouses are recognized for all VA benefits purposes if the marriage was valid in the state where contracted.
View in tracker - 2014GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 4-2014 — Concurrent receipt — CRSC and CRDP interplay
No. Veterans must elect between CRSC and CRDP each open season. CRSC is generally more advantageous for combat-related disabilities; CRDP is broader but taxable.
View in tracker - 2013CAVC Case Law
Geib v. Shinseki — 733 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2013)
The Board, not a medical examiner, makes the ultimate TDIU determination. A medical opinion saying a veteran 'can work' is not dispositive.
View in tracker - 2013CAVC Case Law
Vazquez-Claudio v. Shinseki — 713 F.3d 112 (Fed. Cir. 2013)
A higher mental health rating requires both the kind of symptoms contemplated AND the corresponding level of overall occupational/social impairment.
View in tracker - 2011CAVC Case Law
Mitchell v. Shinseki — 25 Vet. App. 32 (2011)
Painful motion alone does not entitle a claimant to a higher rating; pain must actually result in functional loss to support an increased rating under DeLuca.
View in tracker - 2011CAVC Case Law
Henderson v. Shinseki — 562 U.S. 428 (2011)
The 120-day deadline to appeal a Board decision to the CAVC is not a jurisdictional bar — equitable tolling may be available in extraordinary circumstances.
View in tracker - 2010GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 10-2010 — PTSD stressor verification — fear of hostile activity
When a VA psychiatrist or psychologist confirms the claimed stressor is consistent with the places, types, and circumstances of the veteran's service, no further corroboration is required if the stressor involves fear of hostile activity.
View in tracker - 2009CAVC Case Law
Rice v. Shinseki — 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009)
TDIU is part of an increased-rating claim whenever evidence of unemployability is raised by the record — VA cannot require a separate TDIU application.
View in tracker - 2009CAVC Case Law
Clemons v. Shinseki — 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009)
A claim for one mental health condition (e.g., PTSD) is a claim for any mental health condition the evidence supports — VA cannot deny on the basis that the diagnosis differs from what was claimed.
View in tracker - 2009CAVC Case Law
Moore v. Shinseki — 555 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2009)
VA's duty to assist requires reasonable efforts to obtain federal records, including service treatment records, until they are obtained or shown to not exist.
View in tracker - 2008CAVC Case Law
Thun v. Peake — 22 Vet. App. 111 (2008)
Established the three-step framework for extraschedular ratings under 38 C.F.R. § 3.321(b)(1): inadequate schedular rating, exceptional disability picture, marked interference with employment or frequent hospitalization.
View in tracker - 2007CAVC Case Law
Jandreau v. Nicholson — 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007)
Lay persons are competent to identify medical conditions in limited circumstances — those involving simple identification, contemporaneous diagnosis, or symptoms supporting a later diagnosis.
View in tracker - 2007CAVC Case Law
Barr v. Nicholson — 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007)
Once VA undertakes to provide an exam, the exam must be adequate. An inadequate exam frustrates judicial review and requires remand.
View in tracker - 2007CAVC Case Law
Hart v. Mansfield — 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007)
Extended Fenderson staged-rating doctrine to increased-rating claims, not just initial claims.
View in tracker - 2007GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 1-2007 — Reasonably raised claims
Yes. VA has a duty to sympathetically read the record and adjudicate any claim reasonably raised by the evidence — including secondary service connection theories the veteran did not explicitly identify.
View in tracker - 2006CAVC Case Law
Buchanan v. Nicholson — 451 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2006)
VA cannot reject lay evidence (a veteran's own statements about symptoms) solely because contemporaneous medical records do not corroborate it.
View in tracker - 2006CAVC Case Law
McLendon v. Nicholson — 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006)
VA must provide a medical exam when there is (1) competent evidence of current disability, (2) evidence of in-service event, (3) an indication the two may be associated, and (4) insufficient medical evidence to decide.
View in tracker - 2004CAVC Case Law
Shedden v. Principi — 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004)
Restated and refined the elements required to establish direct service connection, reinforcing Caluza in the Federal Circuit context.
View in tracker - 2004CAVC Case Law
Wagner v. Principi — 370 F.3d 1089 (Fed. Cir. 2004)
Where a condition was not noted on entrance and the veteran was presumed sound, VA must rebut soundness with clear and unmistakable evidence that the condition pre-existed AND was not aggravated by service.
View in tracker - 2004GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 11-2004 — Earlier effective date — clear and unmistakable error (CUE)
A CUE finding can establish an effective date as early as the date of the underlying claim that contained the error, but generally not before that claim was filed — even if the error itself occurred at a later adjudication.
View in tracker - 2004GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 12-2004 — Effective dates for service-connected conditions
The effective date is the date the reopening claim was received, not the date of the original denied claim — unless CUE in the original denial is established.
View in tracker - 2004GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 5-2004 — Character of discharge — 'dishonorable conditions' bar
Only an Honorable or General Under Honorable Conditions discharge qualifies for full VA benefits. Other-Than-Honorable, Bad Conduct (special court-martial), and Undesirable discharges trigger a Character of Discharge determination; Bad Conduct (general court-martial) and Dishonorable bar most benefits absent specific exceptions.
View in tracker - 2003GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 8-2003 — Aggravation of preexisting injury
VA must show by clear and unmistakable evidence that any increase in disability during service was due to the natural progress of the condition — not merely that the underlying condition existed before service.
View in tracker - 2003GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 3-2003 — Presumption of soundness — entrance examinations
VA must show by clear and unmistakable evidence both (1) that the condition existed before service AND (2) that it was not aggravated by service. Wagner v. Principi (Fed. Cir. 2004) later codified this two-part test.
View in tracker - 2003GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 7-2003 — Veterans Court — finality and res judicata
Yes. A final, unappealed Board decision is binding under principles of res judicata. The only paths to revisit are CUE motions, supplemental claims with new and material evidence, or motions to reopen for prior unestablished service connection.
View in tracker - 2002CAVC Case Law
Mauerhan v. Principi — 16 Vet. App. 436 (2002)
The symptoms listed in the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders are examples, not an exhaustive list. The Board must consider all symptoms and overall occupational/social impairment.
View in tracker - 2001GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 9-2001 — Total disability based on individual unemployability (TDIU)
No. Age cannot be used as a basis for granting or denying TDIU. Only service-connected disabilities and their effect on employability may be considered.
View in tracker - 2000CAVC Case Law
Maxson v. Gober — 230 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2000)
A long gap between separation and the first documented complaint is evidence VA may weigh against continuity of symptomatology — but it is not dispositive.
View in tracker - 1999CAVC Case Law
Fenderson v. West — 12 Vet. App. 119 (1999)
Created 'staged ratings' for initial-rating appeals — VA must consider whether different ratings are warranted at different periods since the effective date.
View in tracker - 1999GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 9-99 — Special Monthly Compensation — loss of use
Loss of use exists when no effective function remains other than that which would be equally well served by an amputation with prosthesis — judged on the totality of functional capacity, not isolated test findings.
View in tracker - 1998GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 9-98 — Separate ratings — scars and underlying condition
Yes, if the scar produces functional impairment (limitation of motion, pain on examination, or disfigurement) distinct from the underlying disability being separately rated.
View in tracker - 1997GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 23-97 — Separate ratings — knee instability and arthritis
Yes. Where instability is rated under DC 5257 and arthritis with limited motion is rated under DC 5003/5260/5261, the two ratings address different functional impairments and may be combined without violating the rule against pyramiding.
View in tracker - 1995CAVC Case Law
Caluza v. Brown — 7 Vet. App. 498 (1995)
Established the three-element test for direct service connection: (1) current disability, (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation, and (3) medical nexus linking the two.
View in tracker - 1995CAVC Case Law
Allen v. Brown — 7 Vet. App. 439 (1995)
Secondary service connection is available for any increase in severity of a non-service-connected condition that is proximately due to or aggravated by a service-connected disability.
View in tracker - 1995CAVC Case Law
DeLuca v. Brown — 8 Vet. App. 202 (1995)
Musculoskeletal exams must address functional loss due to pain, weakness, fatigability, incoordination, and lack of endurance — including during flare-ups and after repetitive use.
View in tracker - 1995GC Opinion
VAOPGCPREC 7-95 — Common-law marriage recognition
Common-law marriage is recognized if it was validly established under the law of the state where the parties resided at the time the marriage was formed. VA applies the 'deemed valid' rule for surviving spouses who entered the relationship in good faith.
View in tracker - 1994CAVC Case Law
Layno v. Brown — 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994)
Distinguished 'competent' from 'credible' lay evidence. Lay testimony is competent regarding observable facts but not specialized medical diagnoses.
View in tracker - 1994CAVC Case Law
Combee v. Brown — 34 F.3d 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1994)
A veteran is not precluded from establishing direct service connection for a condition with proof of actual causation, even if the condition is on a presumptive list with unmet criteria.
View in tracker - 1990CAVC Case Law
Gilbert v. Derwinski — 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990)
When evidence is in approximate balance, the benefit of the doubt under 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) belongs to the veteran. The standard is 'equipoise,' not preponderance.
View in tracker
This feed aggregates entries from our CFR Part 4, CAVC Case Law, and General Counsel Precedent trackers. It is for educational reference — confirm any rule, decision, or opinion against the official source before relying on it.