group, and their exclusion from the proposed special clothing allowance would undoubtedly be viewed as discriminatory. It is not known how many amputee veterans wearing prosthetic appliances would qualify for a clothing allowance under the proposed legislation or the average amount which would be awarded within the $180 annual limitation. It would therefore be impossible to make a precise estimate of the cost of H. R. 12223 in the event of its enactment. The latest available statistics (as of May 31, 1956) show 24,599 service-connected amputees wearing artificial limbs, and thus the maximum annual cost would be in the neighborhood of $4,500,000, an amount in the same order of magnitude as the total annual cost for all appliances and repairs furnished to eligible veterans by the Veterans Administration, which has averaged about $5,152,269 a year for the past 5 years. This indication of maximum annual cost does not take into account future variations in the number of serviceconnected amputee cases. While accurate statistics on the clothing repair phase of the overall prosthetics program are not available, it is estimated that the present annual cost for repairs, reweaving, and special linings does not exceed $9,000. While this agency views with sympathetic concern the problems of persons disabled from service-connected causes to the extent that prosthetic appliances are necessary, we are unable to regard the special clothing allowance proposed by the bill as a sound or necessary addition to the benefits and services already available to this group. Accordingly, the Veterans' Administration is unable to recommend favorable consideration of this measure by your committee. Advice has been received from the Bureau of the Budget that there is no objection to the submission of this report and that for the reasons stated in the report the Bureau recommends against favorable consideration of this legislation. Sincerely yours, JOHN S. PATTERSON, VETERANS' ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS, Hon. OLIN E. TEAGUE, Washington 25, D. C., April 1, 1957. Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR MR. TEAGUE: Reference is made to your request for a report by the Veterans' Administration on H. R. 69, 85th Congress, a bill to provide that no application shall be required for the payment of statutory awards for certain conditions which, prior to August 1, 1952, have been determined by the Veterans' Administration to be service connected. The purpose of the bill is to authorize payment of the statutory award of $47 monthly for the anatomical loss or loss of use of a creative organ and the statutory award of $67 monthly for an arrested tuberculous disease (provided initially under subpars. (k) and (q), respectively, of par. II. pt. I, Veterans Regulation No. 1 (a) by Public Law 427, 82d Cong., approved June 30, 1952) in all cases determined to be service connected at the effective date of the amendatory act, without the requirement of a claim being filed in such cases for the new benefit. H. R. 69 is identical with H. R. 6937 and H. R. 7144, 84th Congress. H. R. 7144 passed the House of Representatives on May 7, 1956. The Veterans' Administration submitted a report to your committee on H. R. 6937 under date of July 6, 1955 (Committee Print No. 150), a copy of which is enclosed. The views expressed in the mentioned report on H. R. 6937 are equally applicable to H. R. 69, 85th Congress. Advice has been received from the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the submission of this report to your com mittee. Sincerely yours, H. V. HIGLEY, Administrator. COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES VETERANS' ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS, Hon. OLIN E. TEAGUE, Washington 25, D. C., July 6, 1955. Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR MR. TEAGUE: Reference is made to your request for a report by the Veterans' Administration on H. R. 6937, 84th Congress, a bill to provide that no application shall be required for the payment of statutory awards for certain conditions which, prior to August 1, 1952, have been determined by the Veterans' Administration to be service connected. The purpose of the bill is to authorize payment of the statutory award of $47 monthly for the anatomical loss or loss of use of a creative organ and the statutory award of $67 monthly for arrested tuberculous disease (provided initially under subpars. (k) and_(q), respectively, of par. II, pt. I, Veterans Regulation No. 1 (a), by Public Law 427, 82d Cong., approved June 30, 1952) in all cases determined to be service connected at the effective date of the amendatory act, without the requirement of a claim being filed in such cases for the new benefit. Public Law 427, 82d Congress, authorized increases in the existing rates payable for certain conditions and, as indicated, provided for the first time under Public, No. 2, 73d Congress, a rate of compensation ($47 monthly) for the loss of use of a creative organ with respect to veterans of World War II and those who served on or after June 27, 1950, and prior to February 1, 1955. The benefit was previously available under other law only to veterans of World War Ì. Likewise, the act provided for the first time a statutory rate of compensation ($67 monthly) for arrested tuberculous disease for veterans of World War II and for those who served on or after June 27, 1950, and prior to February 1, 1955, which benefit previously was available only to veterans of World War I. I. Veterans' Administration Instruction No. 1, implementing Public Law 427, provided, among other things, for an automatic increase as of August 1, 1952 (the effective date of Public Law 427), in the rates of existing awards payable to persons then on the rolls. However, the minimum rate for arrested tuberculosis of a noncompensable degree and the special allowance for the loss of use of a creative organ were considered as new benefits as to which an application would be required with payment authorized from the date of filing claim. Recognition of the fact that new benefits were to be granted in this instance is reflected in the reports from the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, House of Representatives, and the Senate Finance Committee (H. Rept. No. 1931; S. Rept. No. 1681), which considered H. R. 7783, 82d Congress, subsequently enacted as Public Law 427, to the effect that the bill authorized for the first time a statutory award for the loss or loss of use of a creative organ with respect to veterans of World War II and veterans of the Korean conflict. The right to the benefit was created by the act. It did not exist prior to the enactment of Public Law 427, 82d Congress. The same reasoning is applicable as to cases of arrested tuberculosis. There are no readily available data as to the number of veterans who might benefit under the provisions of the bill. Therefore, no estimate of the cost of the bill, if enacted, can be submitted. However, it is obvious that the cost of the proposed legislation is limited to retroactive benefits for a presumably small group. The cost should not be great for the first year and should be negligible, or nonexistent, for subsequent years. Although the direct effects of H. R. 6937 would not be of major significance, it is believed that enactment of the bill would be an unwise precedent, particularly with respect to requiring automatic review of cases not actively on the rolls at the time of enactment of new benefit legislation. Due to the urgent request of the committee for a report on this measure, there has not been sufficient time in which to ascertain from the Bureau of the Budget the relationship of the proposed legislation to the program of the President. Sincerely yours, JOHN S. PATTERSON, (For and in the absence of H. V. Higley, Administrator). VETERANS' ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS, Hon. OLIN E. TEAGUE, Washington 25, D. C., December 31, 1957. Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR MR. TEAGUE: Reference is made to your request for a report by the Veterans' Administration on H. R. 405, 85th Congress, a bill to prohibit the severance of a service-connected disability which has been in effect for 10 or more years. This will also serve as a report on H. R. 6716, 85th Congress, which is similar in purpose to H. R. 405. The purpose of the bill is to provide that a service connection which has been made for compensation, pension, or insurance purposes under laws administered by the Veterans' Administration, and which has been in force for 10 or more years, shall not be severed thereafter unless on a showing that the original rating was based on fraud or gross misrepresentation. Under the provisions of Public Law 494, 79th Congress, approved July 9, 1946, all monetary benefits, other than retirement pay, for service-connected disability or death, payable under laws administered by the Veterans' Administration are designated compensation and not pension. Accordingly, the use of the term "pension" in the bill is not relevant to the subject of service connection. Furthermore, the bill apparently assumes there is a basic relationship between service connection and the benefit of insurance. Insurance is based on a contractual right and is normally not concerned with the matter of service connection. If a veteran with a service-connected disability for compensation purposes is granted insurance under the provisions of section 620 of the National Service Life Insurance Act, as amended, or reinstates his United States Government life insurance under the provisions of section 304 of the World War Veterans' Act, 1924, as amended, the policy issue in the former or reinstatement in the latter is incontestable except for fraud, nonpayment of premiums, or on the ground that the applicant was not a member of the military, naval, or air forces of the United States, and the matter of service connection is not a factor. There is only a remote possibility that the bill, if enacted, would enable a few policyholders of United States Government life insurance who would not otherwise be eligible, to reinstate their insurance under section 304 of the World War Veterans' Act, 1924, as amended, or to be granted premium waiver under section 306 of the act. The bill, therefore, pertains almost exclusively to the benefit of compensation. The multitude of provisions of law affecting adjudication of claims for compensation and the many regulations and instructions necessarily required for the proper functioning of the rating agencies of the Veterans' Administration make it inevitable that service connection on occasions is erroneously authorized. Errors in adjudication may arise from misinterpretation or misapplication of the law or facts. Under existing law the Veterans' Administration has the latitude of correcting obvious or clear and unmistakable erroneous actions in rating and adjudication. When discovery is made that a claim has been erroneously denied, the rating should be, and is, changed and the claim paid. Conversely, in cases in which a claim is erroneously allowed, the error should be, and is, corrected. Under existing procedure, service connection once granted is not discontinued unless such grant is shown to have resulted from clear and unmistakable error. There does not appear to be any valid reason for allowing a person to continue to receive compensation merely because at some time in the past he was erroneously granted compensation to which he was not entitled. The bill would require the perpetuation of clear and unmistakable error discovered in any case after 10 years. The Veterans' Administration has no data on which to estimate the cost of the bill, if enacted. For the foregoing reasons, the Veterans' Administration does not recommend favorable consideration of the bill by your committee. Advice has been received from the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the submission of this report to the com mittee and that for the reasons stated therein the Bureau recommends against favorable consideration of the proposed legislation. Sincerely yours, SUMNER G. WHITTIER, Administrator. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, Hon. OLIN E. TEAGUE, PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, Washington, D. C., June 3, 1958. Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your letter of May 26 asking for our comments on a number of bills pending before your committee which propose changes in the provisions of law governing the statutory presumptions of service connection for specified diseases and conditions. All but three of the bills which you enclosed for our review were introduced in the first session of this Congress prior to the enactment of the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1957 (Public Law 85-56) and consequently are drafted in the form of amendments to portions of the Veterans Regulations which have since been repealed by the 1957 act. Since that statute is a consolidation and rearrangement of existing law and regulations regarding veterans' benefits, it is difficult for us to determine quickly either the intended effect of these proposals or how much of that intention has already been accomplished by the passage of the restatement. Three of the enclosed bills, however, would amend the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1957. H. R. 9896 would increase the presumptive period of service connection to 3 years, for purposes of wartime disability compensation, for multiple sclerosis and functional psychoses. H. R. 10029 would establish a 2-year period for organic heart disease for purposes of wartime disability compensation. H. R. 12096 would provide for a 3-year presumptive period in the case of active tuberculosis for purposes of peacetime disability compensation. As we understand it, the establishment of these periods during which there will be a statutory, but rebuttable presumption, of service connection in the case of certain specified diseases and conditions rests in large part upon such considerations as the state of medical and scientific knowledge regarding the causes of the disease or condition, and the period of time or the variations in the period of time that may be required for the disability to manifest itself or to be diagnosed with reasonable accuracy. We believe, therefore, that the Service could best assist your committee by supplying you with such information as we now have on these aspects of those proposals which are being given active consideration. If you will indicate the general disease areas for which your committee is interested in reconsidering the present provisions for statutory presumptions of service connection, we will be glad to make available to you the technical advice of Public Health Service experts in those fields. We do not, however, believe that we are in a position to comment on the desirability of the particular proposals. Sincerely yours, JOHN D. PORTERFIELD, |