Part X, Subpart i, Chapter 3, Section AJurisdiction for Special Act and Foreign Residency Claims

Revised April 14, 2015

X.i.3.A.1.a#Definition: Special Act Award

A special act award is an award of benefits authorized under a private law.Reference: For more information on special acts, see 38 CFR 3.801.

X.i.3.A.1.b#Determining Jurisdiction and Authorizing Special Act Awards

Use the table below to

• determine jurisdiction of a special act claim, and
• authorize a special act award.

Note: Regardless of jurisdiction, enter the following notation in the Remarks of the award to specify the particular special act under which the award is made:

Benefits authorized under[enter special act]approved [date].

Reference: For more information on considerations in rating and authorization action with foreign residency jurisdiction, see M21-1, Part X, Subpart i, 3.A.3.

2Jurisdiction for Claims Involving Foreign Residency

Revised May 7, 2026

X.i.3.A.2.a#Jurisdiction Over Claims Involving Foreign Residency

Jurisdiction over claims involving foreign residency is divided among the following offices:

• the Pittsburgh RO for rating and non-rating disability compensation claims
• the Philadelphia PMC for all original Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) claims, all burial claims, and any claim where service-connected (SC) death is an issue, including claims from the Philippines
• the Milwaukee PMC for all remaining PMC claims, including DIC claims where SC death was already granted, received from residents of the Philippines, and
• the Milwaukee and St. Paul PMCs for all other foreign pension and DIC claims not specified above.

Exceptions :

• Manila RO has jurisdiction of disability compensation rating claims for residents of the Philippines.
• San Diego Benefit Eligibility Support Team has jurisdiction of non-rating disability compensation claims for residents of the Philippines.

Notes:

• U.S. territories are not considered foreign residences.
• All legacy appeals, including those for pension and survivor benefits are the jurisdiction of the appropriate decision review operations center.

References: For more information on

• claim jurisdiction and transfer, see M21-1, Part II, Subpart ii, 3, and
• PMC alignment and jurisdiction, see M21-1, Part I, Subpart ii, 1.C.

3Considerations in Rating and Authorization Action With Foreign Residency Jurisdiction

This topic contains information on considerations in rating and authorization action with foreign residency jurisdiction, including

• determining which station takes rating and authorization action, and
• authorization and rating action taken by the Pittsburgh RO, Philadelphia PMC, Milwaukee PMC, or St. Paul PMC.

Revised July 7, 2022

X.i.3.A.3.a#Determining Which Station Takes Rating and Authorization Action

When additional evidence or information is received the office currently assigned by National Work Queue (NWQ) would generally complete authorization and rating action necessitated by the newly-received evidence.Exceptions:

• The currently assigned station may not take rating or authorization action when the Pittsburgh RO, Philadelphia PMC, Milwaukee PMC, or St. Paul PMC has exclusive jurisdiction over the claim to which the newly-received evidence relates.
• When the Pittsburgh RO, Philadelphia PMC, Milwaukee PMC, or St. Paul PMC is the assigned station, it may not take the rating or authorization action necessitated by newly-received evidence only if the immediate reassignment of the claims folder is required.

Reference: For more information on claim jurisdiction and transfer, including the role of NWQ, see M21-1, Part II, Subpart ii, 3.

X.i.3.A.3.b#Authorization and Rating Action Taken by the Pittsburgh RO, Philadelphia PMC, Milwaukee PMC, or St. Paul PMC

When it is appropriate for the Pittsburgh RO, Philadelphia PMC, Milwaukee PMC, or St. Paul PMC to take rating and authorization action based on receipt of additional evidence, the station must

• complete the action
• draft and send decision notice to the claimant and any representative (if represented), and
• ensure that the rating decision, decision notice and award are present in the electronic claims folder.

Reference: For more information on decision authorization and claimant notification, see M21-1, Part VI, Subpart i, 1.A and B.

4Routing Mail for Claims From Foreign Residents

This topic contains policies regarding routing mail for claims from foreign residents, including

• determining jurisdiction over mail from residents of a foreign country, and
• claims from dependents residing in a foreign country.

Revised September 21, 2022

X.i.3.A.4.a#Determining Jurisdiction Over Mail From Residents of a Foreign Country

When mail is received for disability compensation, pension, or survivor claims and related legacy appeals for any foreign location, the mail will be processed in the Centralized Mail portal.Use the table below when determining jurisdiction for mail related to pension or survivor claims processed by PMCs received from residents of foreign countries.

Exception: For mail related to claims received from dependents residing in a foreign country, see M21-1, Part X, Subpart i, 3.A.4.b.

Notes:

• American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands (Rota, Saipan, and Tinian) are U.S. territories; they are not foreign countries.

• Activate the Foreign corporate flash upon receipt of a claim or legacy appeal that

  • is subject to NWQ routing, and

  • was submitted by an individual with a foreign address.

References: For more information on

• foreign claim jurisdiction, see M21-1, Part II, Subpart ii, 3.1.b, and

• activating a corporate flash, see the Share User Guide.

X.i.3.A.4.b#Claims From Dependents Residing in a Foreign Country

Jurisdiction over claims from dependents residing in a foreign country is based on the primary beneficiary’s place of residence and entitlement and not on the dependent’s place of residence. Example: A Veteran living in Salt Lake City, Utah, files a claim for disability compensation. After the Salt Lake City RO awards entitlement based on a 50-percent disability evaluation, the Veteran’s dependent, who lives in Seoul, Korea, files a claim for an apportioned share of the Veteran’s benefits. Result: Because the Veteran resides within the jurisdiction of the Salt Lake City RO, this RO – not the Pittsburgh RO – is responsible for processing the dependent’s claim.