[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},"mediaId",6107127,"mediaKeyId","2778455-cb8b2ac56a6965d23f735b0291b80760","parentId",2778455,"title","Subcommittee weighs bills to simplify VA claims: missed exams, forms, notice letters and training for military sexual trauma claims","audioSeconds",588,"startMs",1012000,"endMs",1600000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2778455-cb8b2ac56a6965d23f735b0291b80760&start=1012&end=1600","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2778455-cb8b2ac56a6965d23f735b0291b80760/thumbnail_1012000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6107127/Subcommittee-weighs-bills-to-simplify-VA-claims-missed-exams-forms-notice-letters-and-training-for-military-sexual-trauma-claims","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6107127-5215222b0e99e77695829d3faf283bd6/orig.mp4?Expires=1770897387&Signature=bezG~54kZHTMX42xd~C7UGjideVhWcSzGJTr3UFp6y3dmzjcTpC7pssNteUOsSgOALIZlTPSLwVShU5VIxvfEfnrE4HNJBFypW-zcTyPriXU3UGVaAlJ3LN1Mo9qZzC2Ugx4dzFM9EiWyrNb~ar78A7bSR9jo3E4tACSfFBIulVrpdS5Fyf8JOoGGe~LsbJspZHHSO4sChzX7LlqxpKMNznENu5NWkqbJ9~cmT7zgCoWiPRznJ9rM02pqaUQjBDad1N9vJwGuaTfZLANlrkzJhRZHwYYZ10H9aDDz2bU1igiLpuAKbcxnt2wq2yV~oxpHooah4FxllUHweAaXFzn6A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","U.S. House Committee on Veterans' Affairs","date","2025-03-17T16:03:43Z","article","A House Veterans Affairs subcommittee hearing considered a suite of bipartisan proposals to make VA claims and appeals easier to navigate, including measures to prevent automatic denials when veterans miss scheduled exams, to simplify veteran notice letters and forms, and to expand training and procedural safeguards for military sexual trauma (MST) claims.

Representative Michael Peters and other sponsors outlined several bills on the docket. The Review Every Veterans Claim Act (HR 2137) would prohibit the VA from denying a veteran's claim solely because the claimant missed a scheduled disability exam; advocates told the committee that veterans sometimes cannot attend exams for many reasons and that automatic denial forces unnecessary rework. The National Organization of Veterans' Advocates (NOVA) testified the proposal “reflects a more veteran‑centric policy” and expects the bill would prompt more comprehensive review of files using existing medical evidence.

Several members also urged VA to improve its notice letters and forms. Representative Tim Barrett told the committee, “These letters should be shorter, clearer, and more easily communicating for the veterans and their survivors,” describing notices he said can be lengthy and filled with jargon. Barrett and other sponsors proposed using an outside federally funded research entity to review and recommend revisions to forms and letters so they are more understandable.

Witnesses raised MST processing as a distinct problem. Representative Young Kim discussed HR 2201, the Improving VA Training for Military Sexual Trauma Claims Act, noting that about 1 in 3 women and 1 in 50 men experience MST as service members. Kim and witnesses said current VA sensitivity training for examiners is outdated and often limited; the bill would require annual training for VA employees and contract examiners involved with MST claims and would require the VA to automatically obtain service personnel records for veterans filing MST‑related disability claims.

VA officials told the panel they generally support the goals of these bills but requested drafting changes. In opening remarks, Kanisha Britton said VA “supports the intent” of the simplifying forms and clear communications bills while asking for flexibility and time to comply with information‑technology and legal requirements. The department also said it supports the Review Every Veterans Claim Act but suggested expanding the language to include pension claims and to ensure comprehensive review of all evidence in a claims file.

Other bills briefly noted in opening comments included the Veterans Compensation Cost of Living Adjustment Act (would tie certain VA benefit increases to Social Security cost‑of‑living adjustments) and the Veterans Claims Education Act (proposals to help veterans avoid unaccredited “claim sharks” by providing clearer information on accredited representation). Advocates including NOVA told the committee they support those proposals and urged the committee to consider technical improvements, such as allowing VA to accept an incorrect form as an intent‑to‑file when the claimant’s intent is clear.

What’s next: VA and witnesses agreed to continue working with the committee to refine bill text, align training and contractor obligations with current practice and to ensure reforms do not create unintended administrative burdens that slow claims processing.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs Legislative Hearing","oneSentenceSummary","A House Veterans Affairs subcommittee hearing considered a suite of bipartisan proposals to make VA claims and appeals easier to navigate, including measures to prevent automatic denials when veterans miss scheduled exams, to simplify veteran notice letters and forms, and to expand training and procedural safeguards for military sexual trauma (MST) claims.","taxTitle","Veterans Affairs: House Committee, Standing Committees - House & Senate, Congressional Hearings Compilation, Legislative, Federal","taxId",1825,"location","","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6107137,"House subcommittee hears push for ACES Act to study elevated cancer rates among military aviators",1305,1646000,2951000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2778455-cb8b2ac56a6965d23f735b0291b80760&start=1646&end=2951","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2778455-cb8b2ac56a6965d23f735b0291b80760/thumbnail_1646000.jpg","/articles/6107137/House-subcommittee-hears-push-for-ACES-Act-to-study-elevated-cancer-rates-among-military-aviators","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6107137-3465576f36381930458ca86c4e9c0169/orig.mp4?Expires=1770897387&Signature=bfi19LMQ0WoIV43nT3A5TfKibMiQ99RmGm-69UDxG9OiGqH1qDprv4m3RaK54lfuRH8LiS2lzk6bd7SRwyF7zKt9WbNz3Oz2pgxHgJRz6TKilOfKfMMWkf70~-QD6eNjCCJeZVZ9CpUKMp6VlRWB6GK2-8qi4RelfPx6SHgJf0PtjS7vOTwL0z-UpjZ4D11NZAMrGFNxihR8JjeMO0Yc22cjNX4LmKumbUITPM9ZKx4DCzlQvHdtwwbOKCuEvjJO-LK6LVmP9kHBPV3iri8CweKZSNsta6Ds75ttJmxBmbOPTIr61WYIplKH1JbSyt1SHW9RbhE7UHtlVZUv1iCtbA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A House Veterans Affairs subcommittee hearing on multiple veterans-related bills gave extended attention to HR 5305, the Aviator Cancers Examination Study (ACES) Act, a bipartisan measure that would direct the Department of Veterans Affairs to partner with the National Academies of Sciences to study cancer prevalence among military aviators and identify service‑connected factors.

The measure’s supporters said peer‑reviewed studies show elevated cancer rates among aviators and that faster, focused research is needed to identify causes and prevention strategies. Representative August Pfluger, the bill’s lead House sponsor, described the bill as his top congressional priority and told the panel, “The ACES Act is not just a bill. It's a lifeline for those who have already given and continue to give so much for our freedom.”

Why it matters: witnesses cited multiple recent studies that found higher cancer incidence among certain aircrew. Representative Pfluger and colonel Andrew J. Shurtleff, an Air Force veteran who testified, said the research to date shows a pattern that warrants a focused, independent study to determine causal factors and mitigation steps.

Colonel Shurtleff testified about his own diagnosis and the limits of current knowledge. He told the subcommittee he was diagnosed with a large kidney tumor and metastatic disease in 2019, underwent surgeries and multiple treatments and said, “We must identify the root cause affecting otherwise healthy aircrew.” Shurtleff described the personal and family impact of his illness and said the ACES Act would help “regain the faith of our air crew and our government” by identifying risks unique to the aviation environment.

Supporters cited figures from prior research during the hearing: a 2021 Air Force cancer incidence study that committee members discussed reported roughly 29% higher probability of testicular cancer, 24% higher probability of melanoma and a 23% higher rate of prostate cancer among aircrew compared with the general population. Members and witnesses cautioned those figures are study findings and that ACES would aim to develop the evidence base needed to determine causation and appropriate policy responses.

VA officials said the department supports the intent of the ACES Act but requested edits to give the department flexibility and to avoid duplicating ongoing Department of Defense research. In her opening remarks, Kanisha Britton, the VA assistant deputy undersecretary (Veterans Benefits Administration), told the committee, “VA fully supports the intent of HR 530,” and that VA would like to work with the committee on drafting changes to the bill to ensure coordination with DOD studies.

Committee members pressed for urgency and for VA commitment to act quickly. Representative Pfluger and others urged the VA to brief the secretary and to prioritize the study, arguing that pilots and aircrew — many of whom enter service medically screened and physically fit — are showing troubling patterns of cancer diagnoses after service.

What’s next: sponsors said they will continue to move the bill with bipartisan, bicameral support and work with VA on the edits recommended by the department. The committee left the record open for follow‑up and asked agency witnesses to provide additional data and coordination plans.

","A House Veterans Affairs subcommittee hearing on multiple veterans-related bills gave extended attention to HR 5305, the Aviator Cancers Examination Study (ACES) Act, a bipartisan measure that would direct the Department of Veterans Affairs to partner with the National Academies of Sciences to study cancer prevalence among military aviators and identify service‑connected factors.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6107131,"Subcommittee clashes with VA over appeals transparency and attorney retention at Board of Veterans' Appeals",4764,1367000,6131000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2778455-cb8b2ac56a6965d23f735b0291b80760&start=1367&end=6131","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2778455-cb8b2ac56a6965d23f735b0291b80760/thumbnail_1367000.jpg","/articles/6107131/Subcommittee-clashes-with-VA-over-appeals-transparency-and-attorney-retention-at-Board-of-Veterans-Appeals","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6107131-904e28224ba435aee8697b288cee4cd7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770897387&Signature=ND3XAHG7~1QLPMBXRrhkxF~6jWP9yzYPxhPYMlfswbJoBX1hq3yZ6U2lS8luuy0jkSgd3GGjCUC1ljysmASNXOIMrRiop1wg2PTxCLFHkeTHtMnOsTQgrt17iUwVgAD297A3WyooNVp~JtD75noukWjGujG-1tQ-OD0H5Mu3ZCxm8mJGGF29JQS~oCqMOC-QV6kdLdKNEwg7ThS2MBcCday9oKbqoA8mjlbSuJx-pa6iQVfpaDUN-L2QjGnr5tp7w324I3ABToqSgL1LQqaasPhednBad1Jdfi0geMHB9YalstwO0qJsTmTZaicB2Ol8Ld-MlT4xOC-9w36OHv-WnQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A House Veterans Affairs subcommittee hearing featured sustained questioning about the Board of Veterans' Appeals’ backlog, attorney recruitment and retention, and a proposed transparency measure that would require the board to publish weekly updates on appeals assignments.

Representative Neal Self, sponsor of the Veterans Appeals Transparency Act, said current board averages give veterans “no accurate sense of where they are in line” and argued the bill would require the board to publish weekly updates on which appeals it is working on in each docket. Self told the committee the bill would also direct the board to include a statement clarifying weekly updates do not mean a decision will be made that week.

Department of Veterans Affairs officials opposed the bill as written. Evan Dykert, acting deputy vice chairman at the Board of Veterans' Appeals, said the board is already constrained by statutes and case processing practices and warned that the proposed weekly disclosures risk creating misperceptions and additional litigation. When pressed on processing times, Dykert said, “Currently, as of March 23, direct review was 1 and a half years.”

Members, led by Ranking Member McGarvey, pressed the VA on morale and retention issues. McGarvey criticized proposals or policies he said could damage morale — including talk of terminating modest benefits such as bar‑dues reimbursement for board attorneys — telling the VA, “This is one of those things that could be a morale killer.” He and other members argued that allowing experienced, non‑supervisory attorneys promotion potential is critical to retaining staff who produce high‑quality decisions.

Advocates testified in favor of retention changes. The National Organization of Veterans' Advocates (NOVA) told the committee it supports the Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney Retention and Backlog Reduction Act, which would enable non‑supervisory attorneys at the board to be promoted to GS‑15 to provide a career path for experienced decision writers.

VA’s Kanisha Britton said the department does not support the Veterans Appeals Transparency Act as drafted and raised three concerns: potential litigation risk, administrative burden and confusion for veterans who might misinterpret docket‑assignment listings. Britton also said the Attorney Retention bill “conflicts with the specific classification regulations, lacks clarity on improving decision quality and processing speed, and could seriously impact the board's operations and budget.”

What’s next: Members said they will continue negotiations with VA and press for legislative fixes. Several members urged VA counsel to work the legal issues so the committee can find a mutually acceptable approach that increases transparency without creating unintended legal or operational consequences.

","Lawmakers pressed the VA on appeals backlog, attorney retention and a bill requiring weekly public updates from the Board of Veterans' Appeals; VA officials warned the transparency proposal could cause administrative burdens and confusion, while members pushed for more transparency and protections to retain experienced attorneys.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Subcommittee weighs bills to simplify VA claims: missed exams, forms, notice letters and training for military sexual trauma claims

House subcommittee hears push for ACES Act to study elevated cancer rates among military aviators

Subcommittee clashes with VA over appeals transparency and attorney retention at Board of Veterans' Appeals