943 F.3d 1376
Fed. Cir.2019Background
- Petitioners: four Blue Water Navy veterans and two veterans’ advocacy groups challenged the Secretary of Veterans Affairs’ July 1, 2019 memorandum staying certain disability compensation claims.
- Earlier this year, this court in Procopio v. Wilkie recognized that service in Vietnam’s 12-nautical-mile territorial sea can trigger the §1116 presumption of herbicide exposure.
- Congress enacted the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act of 2019 on June 25, 2019, adding 38 U.S.C. §1116A (effective January 1, 2020) and a §2(c)(3) provision authorizing the Secretary to stay specified pending claims between enactment and implementation.
- The Secretary’s July 1 memorandum directed VBA and the Board to stay decisions on claims related to offshore service and diseases listed in 38 C.F.R. §3.309(e) until January 1, 2020.
- Petitioners sought expedited review under 38 U.S.C. §502, arguing the Secretary lacked authority to impose stays before the Act’s effective date and that the stay could not apply to claims brought under preexisting §1116 (i.e., Procopio-based claims).
- The court asserted jurisdiction under 5 U.S.C. §552(a)(1)(D) because the July 1 memorandum constituted an agency interpretation of general applicability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction: May the court review the Secretary’s memorandum under 5 U.S.C. §552(a)(1)(D)? | Petitioners: Memo is reviewable as an interpretation of general applicability. | Government: Reading §552(a)(1)(D) to cover the memo is too expansive. | Court: Memo is an interpretation of general applicability; jurisdiction exists. |
| Start date: Could the Secretary commence stays as of the Act’s enactment (June 25, 2019)? | Petitioners: Stay is premature because the Act is not effective until Jan 1, 2020. | Secretary: §2(c)(3) authority is effective on enactment to permit stays prior to implementation. | Court: Held Secretary’s stay authority began on enactment (June 25, 2019). |
| End date: Does the Secretary’s authority to stay expire on Jan 1, 2020? | Petitioners: Concern that stays could be extended beyond Jan 1, 2020. | Secretary/Government: Agreed stays terminate at implementation (Jan 1, 2020). | Court: Held statute unambiguously limits stays to the period ending Jan 1, 2020; no extension permitted. |
| Scope: May the Secretary apply the §1116A-authorized stays to pending claims brought under preexisting §1116 (Procopio claims)? | Petitioners: §1116A does not authorize stays of §1116/Procopio claims. | Secretary: §2(c)(3) covers claims "relating to the service and diseases covered by §1116A," encompassing §1116 claims. | Court: Held stays properly extend to §1116 claims; Secretary did not abuse discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Procopio v. Wilkie, 913 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (en banc) (held territorial-sea service entitled to §1116 presumption).
- Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (U.S. 1984) (framework for reviewing agency statutory interpretations).
- Haas v. Peake, 525 F.3d 1168 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (discussing VA internal guidance on land-service requirement).