Sorry for the mess!

The site is undergoing a massive update. All the content on the site still works but things just might look a little messy and disorganized. Most of the upgrades will probably be don by the end of the month. Thank you for your understanding!

Updated Nov 15, 2023

In This Section 

 This section contains the topic “General Information on Partial Rating Decisions and Deferred Issues.”

1.General Information on Partial Rating Decisions and Deferred Issues

Introduction

 This topic contains general information about partial rating decisions and deferred issues, including

Change Date

 November 15, 2023

V.ii.3.B.1.a.When Development to Obtain Additional Evidence May Be Needed

 Development to obtain additional evidence such as a medical examination or other records may be needed if
  • it would provide a more complete picture of a question at issue, or
  • the evidence of record is questionable or conflicting.
Note:  Decision makers must maintain objectivity when assigning weight to a claimant’s evidence and may not develop with the purpose of obtaining evidence to justify a denial of the claim.  Instead, decision makers must be able to support the determination that development is needed. References:  For more information on
  • ordering further development in cases where uncorroborated lay evidence is presented, see Douglas v. Shinseki, 23 Vet.App. 19 (2009)
  • a Veteran’s submission of evidence and refusal to attend a Department of Veterans Affairs examination, see Kowalski v. Nicholson, 19 Vet.App. 171 (2005), and
  • developing with the purpose of denying and explaining the need for development, see Mariano v. Principi, 17 Vet.App. 305 (2003).

V.ii.3.B.1.b.Definition:  Partial Rating Decision

 A partial rating decision is a rating decision that provides a decision on some issues of a claim, but defers a decision on at least one other issue, pending the outcome of additional development.

V.ii.3.B.1.c.When to Make a Partial Rating Decision

 Make a partial rating decision when one or more issues require additional development before they can be decided, but the record otherwise contains sufficient evidence to
  • decide (favorably or not) at least one other issue, and/or
  • make a proposed or final decision on a compensation entitlement issue, such as a reduction in service-connected disability evaluation, severance of service connection (SC), or competency.
Important:
  • It is only appropriate to extend suspense or diary dates if it is necessary for a specific adjudicative action.  Suspense dates must always correspond with specific actions and should not be arbitrarily extended under any circumstance.
  • When employees handle a claim, they are expected to take the most full and complete action possible on a claim every time – including development, rating, and promulgation actions – to move a claim forward to accurate completion in the claims process.  Every effort should be made to move the claim to the next processing cycle each time it is handled.
Exception:  When issues cannot be resolved because of a Veteran’s return to active duty, follow the procedures in M21-1, Part X, Subpart v, 2.A.1.c. References:  For more information on

V.ii.3.B.1.d.Partial Ratings and Automation 

 When a claim involves a mix of automation-eligible and automation-ineligible contentions in a ready for decision status,
  • defer automation-ineligible contentions that have not undergone initial development, and
  • review the automation-eligible contention(s) for completion of a partial rating decision.
References:  For more information on

V.ii.3.B.1.e.Improper Use of a Partial Rating Decision for SC for Cause of Death

 Do not use a partial rating decision to deny SC for cause of death if development is pending or in progress for another condition possibly involved in the cause of death.

V.ii.3.B.1.f.When to Defer an Issue

 Defer an issue when the rating activity receives a claim that is underdeveloped or incomplete when proper disposition of that issue depends on resolution of a development action. Reference:  For more information on Veterans Benefits Management System (VBMS) deferrals, see

V.ii.3.B.1.g.Procedure for Deferring Previously Denied Issues

 When a decision on a previously denied issue must now be deferred, decision makers should ensure the coded conclusion of the Codesheet lists the
  • previously denied issue as deferred, and
  • date of the prior denial in the ORIGINAL DATE OF DENIAL field.
Example: Follow the steps in the table below when deferring a previously denied issue.
Step Action
1 Ensure the
  • previously denied issue is reflected on the MASTER RECORD tab in VBMS-Rating, and
  • appropriate date is listed in the ORIGINAL DATE OF DENIAL field.
Example: References:  For more information on
2 On the ISSUE MANAGEMENT tab, follow the steps for establishing issues outlined in the VBMS Rating User Guide.
3 Select the relevant issue in the ISSUE LIST field and click on the ENTER DECISION button.
4 From the SELECT EVALUATION BUILDER screen,
  • choose Disability Decision Information – Manual Entry, and
  • click on the OK button.
5 On the DISABILITY DECISION INFORMATION screen, choose Deferred from the DECISION drop-down menu.
6 Complete the other required decision entries.
References:  For more information on

V.ii.3.B.1.h.Action to Take When SC for Cause of Death Is Deferred for Further Development

 If the rating activity returns a case for further development with regard to the issue of SC for cause of death,
  • request the indicated evidence
  • award pension benefits if entitlement is established and an award was not made prior to submission of the case to the rating activity, and
  • establish a 30-day control for submission of the requested evidence.
Once the 30-day evidentiary submission period has elapsed, resubmit the case to the rating activity for issuance of a formal decision on the issue of SC for cause of death.