VI.ii.3.C.1.g. RO Concurrently Processes Multiple VA Forms 21-8951 From the Same Veteran for Multiple Fiscal Years
|
|
Scenario:
- A Veteran with a combined disability rating of 10 percent attended 65 days of training each fiscal year between 2012 through 2015.
- Each time the Veteran received a VA Form 21-8951 from the Hines Information Technology Center, she completed, signed, and returned it to the local RO.
- The local RO saved the VA Forms 21-8951 that it received each year from the Veteran but was unable to process any of them because the RO was understaffed.
- The local RO underwent a hiring initiative in June 2016 and, after training 10 new employees, was finally able to process all the Veteran’s VA Forms 21-8951 (concurrently) in August 2016.
- The monthly rate of compensation payable to the Veteran on the last day of fiscal year
- 2012 (September 30, 2012) is $127.00
- 2013 (September 30, 2013) is $129.00
- 2014 (September 30, 2014) is $130.94, and
- 2015 (September 30, 2015) is $133.17.
Results:
- VA reduces the Veteran’s award to
- $6.17 ($133.17 – $127.00), effective October 1, 2015
- $4.17 ($133.17 – $129.00), effective December 6, 2015
- $2.23 ($133.17 – $130.94), effective February 11, 2016, and
- $0.00, effective April 16, 2016.
- VA resumes payments at the monthly rate of $133.17, effective June 21, 2016.
Notes:
- There was no COLA on December 1, 2015. Had there been, the Veteran would have been entitled to
- $6.17 plus the amount of the COLA, for the period December 1, 2015, through December 5, 2015
- $4.17 plus the amount of the COLA, effective December 6, 2015
- $2.23 plus the amount of the COLA, effective February 11, 2016
- the amount of the COLA, effective April 16, 2016, and
- $133.17, plus the amount of the COLA, effective June 21, 2016.
- As explained in M21-1, Part VI, Subpart ii, 3.A.5.b, it is now VA policy to make all award adjustments necessitated by a Veteran’s receipt of drill pay retroactively. Had the local RO in this scenario been able to concurrently process all of the Veteran’s VA Forms 21-8951 much earlier in 2016 (March, instead of August, for example) it would have had to take a different approach than the one described under the Results sublabel in order to comply with this policy. The RO would have had to begin the series of withholdings listed under the Results sublabel from an earlier date, such as
- the date of the most recent award line that precedes October 1, 2015 (this might be December 1, 2014, which was the effective date for a COLA), or
- the first day of the fiscal year prior to fiscal year 2015 (October 1, 2014).
|