Showing posts with label 74th AES. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 74th AES. Show all posts

23 April 2024

Master Sergeant Vincent G. McCrave Jr., USAF Retired

We lost one of the best on April 11, 2024! Family and friends gathered to say farewell on April 22 in Clermont, Florida, followed by military honors.

Vinny was a leader in the 74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron at Westover, and one of the first men I met when I joined in 1974. In a unit full of wonderful people, he was exceptional. 

Vinny was a med tech flight examiner and Desert Storm veteran. He had years of flying the unit's C-123 aircraft, and consequently suffered many of the typical Agent Orange illnesses.

In addition to his beloved wife, he leaves two sons Vincent G. McCrave III and his wife Lynn of Bellville, IL and Michael McCrave and his wife Bev of St. Petersburg, FL. His daughter Michele Bessette of Pawtucket, RI. was especially helpful arranging Vinny's veterans benefits.

He will be missed by eight grandchildren – Dan McCrave-Bessette, Shannon Schwoebel, Britt Whitney, Meghan McCrave, Mitchell McCrave, Matthew McCrave, Thomas Bessette and Hailey Roberson.

April 1987: Vinny's son swearing him in
for another six year reenlistment.
Be at ease, Sergeant McCrave. You honored the flag all your life. Now the flag honors you.


05 July 2023

VA's initial denial of C-123 Agent Orange exposure claims - ABSURD!

A little history about VBA's deceptions and cruelty in treating Agent Orange claims:

We started discussions with VA about C-123 Agent Orange exposure in 2010 and met brick-wall resistance. In 2012 we were told during an in-person conference with Mr. Tom Murphy (Director of VBA Benefits Administration) and his staff that VA had already concluded no C-123 crew or maintainer exposure was possible.

Adding a kicker that this, he told me directly that regardless of what medical, scientific or military evidence we might present then or in the future, absolutely no C-123 claims for Agent Orange exposure would ever be approved. 

For claims that were denied and then appealed to the Board of Veterans Appeals, here is the boilerplate denial verbiage they came up with:

VA's Office of Public Health is noted to have thoroughly reviewed all available scientific information regarding the exposure potential to residual amounts of herbicides on the C-123 aircraft surfaces. It was concluded that the potential exposure for the post-Vietnam crews that flew or maintained the aircraft was extremely low and therefore it was concluded that the risk of long-term health effects was minimal.

Naturally, I inquired as to exactly what was meant by their "thoroughly reviewed all available scientific information". VA's answer was they'd simply reached a staff consensus in the VHA Post-Deployment Public Health office that no exposure threat existed. And if there was any exposure, it wasn't significant "enough" to cause any adverse health effects. In other words, there was NO such thorough review of relevant literature and only a knee-jerk decision to deny claims.

And boy, did they ever deny claims! Every single one of them.*

I'll point out here that prior to meeting with Murphy, VA had been provided input from numerous scientific and medical authorities as to our exposures. Columbia University, Yale, University of Texas, Oregon Health Sciences University and others had specifically concluded that C-123 vets had been exposed to Agent Orange. I'll remind readers that VA is required to give every benefit of the doubt to veterans' claims, to review claims sympathetically and in a pro-veteran manner yet"required" didn't seem to apply to C-123 claims.

Other federal authorities had also chimed in to support us against VA: the CDC Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry had reported to VA that C-123 veterans experienced 180 times the published military exposure threshold for Agent Orange. Further, that we have a 200-fold greater risk of cancers developing. Eventually, even the Army's Joint Services Records Research Center tried to tell VA we met exposure requirements, but VA's Mr. Jim Sampsel refused to recognize such input. Note here that VA's own regulations specified that Joint Services Records Research Center input was authoritative as regards Agent Orange exposure claims. Nonetheless, Sampsel disputed everything. (Later, Sampsel even told VA's Disability Compensation Committee that Agent Orange was merely hype and hysteria.)

It seems VA was very selective as to what "available scientific information" they were willing to consider, and that nothing affirming the veterans' exposure would be acceptable to them. And nothing ever was acceptable, at least until the Institute of Medicine virtually jammed it down their throats in January 2015.

* Here was a special VA deception. Every single C-123 claim was denied until June 2015, yet Sampsel and Murphy insisted there was no "blanket denial" policy. Clearly, their only policy was that none would ever be approved regardless of what the policy might be named. They disingenuously insisted that each claim was carefully evaluated on its merits, while quietly pretending that C-123 claims were without any merit regardless of medical and scientific evidence.

02 January 2019

Major Diane Sampson Passed December 31, 2018

This very sad news was received today. Diane attended my wedding at Hanscom AFB, arriving after a hasty departure and two hour drive from her hospital and still in her scrubs...but she was there. In earlier years I attended her brothers' memorial services and admired Diane's steady support to her parents. God bless and keep our dedicated flight nurse.

Diane R Sampson

AUGUST 16, 1955 ~ DECEMBER 31, 2018 (AGE 63)
Obituary Image



Diane R.(Nosar) Sampson, 63, passed away on December 31, 2018 at Baystate Medical Center. She was born in Holyoke to Walter and Muriel (Giguere) Sampson. Diane served her country in the United States Air Force as an enlisted aeromedical evacuation technician and after receiving her RN, as a Flight Nurse (74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron) for 20 years retiring as a Major. She was a veteran of Desert Shield and Desert Storm.
Following her service she worked as a maternity nurse and a psychiatric nurse for Providence Hospital in Holyoke. Diane was a member of the Massachusetts Nurses Association. 
Diane is survived by her loving daughters, Alyssa Sampson of Hampden and Sabrina Sampson of Holyoke, her parents, Walter and Muriel Sampson of Westfield, her cherished granddaughters, Alivia and Taylor, her brothers, Walter Sampson, Jr of Westfield and Donald Sampson of Texas and her best friend Cathleen Wilson of Chicopee. Sadly Diane was predeceased by two brothers, Thomas and Robert. Diane’s funeral will be held on Friday, January 4, 2019 with a Mass at 10:30AM in St. Mary’s Church, Bartlett St. Westfield followed by burial in St. Mary’s Cemetery, Southampton Rd. Westfield. Visiting hours will be held prior to the Mass from 8:30-10 AM in the Firtion Adams FS, 76 Broad St. Westfield, MA 01085. www.firtionadams.com

28 December 2018

GAO Criticizes DOD's Agent Orange Site Report

The Government Accountability Office has released its critical report entitled AGENT ORANGE: Actions Needed to Improve Accuracy and Communication of Information on Testing and Storage Locations."

Key point: Both VA and DOD have for decades relied on a fatally-flawed list prepared for DOD by Dr. Al Young, AKA "Dr. Orange." VA has employed his reports principally to deny veterans claiming exposure to Agent Orange. That's right...our famed nemesis has once again been found inadequate in the work he's done, while making millions from VA and DOD writing about this stuff. For years, VA adjudicators, the Board of Veterans Appeals and the US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims have wrongly denied claims from veterans who claim exposure in locations or situations not listed in Young's report. C-123 vets were also denied for years, but won our presumptive exposure ruling in June 2015...despite Young's ceaseless efforts against us.

The GAO reported it plainly: VA seized on Young's incomplete report to refuse medical care and other benefits to veterans claiming Agent Orange cancers, ALS, diabetes, heart disease and other ailments. And Young's report, along with lots of other material gathered by VA, was fatally flawed.

At the Veterans Benefits Administration "Agent Orange Desk" run by Mr. James Sampsel, (who himself officially stated that veterans' Agent Orange disabilities is only "hype and hysteria.") VA had its boiler-plate denial ready to shoot down each and every claim of Agent Orange exposure outside Vietnam, It is important to grasp the great reliance placed by VA on Young's work, and the equal fact that Young has consistently argued against the various foundations for veterans' Agent Orange claims. His 2006 report on Agent Orange sites is but one example of VA's obstruction that led to the GAO report.

Even if discouraged vets opted to appeal Sampsel's use of the Young report to oppose claims, the Board of Appeals for Veterans Claims (BVA) also relied on Young to prevent exposure claims. For example, read this November 2014 BVA denial:
"In fact, Dr. Young's report, which provides the most complete data available on this subject, expressly found that there was there were no documents or records to validate the use of Agent Orange in Okinawa. In this case, the Board finds the exhaustive searches and related findings conducted by the various agencies/entities outlined above, to be far more probative than the Veteran's baseless assertions that he was exposed to Agent Orange/herbicides in Okinawa. Notably, the Veteran has not submitted any medical reports/literature or other evidence to support his claim of exposure, or that otherwise contradict the above findings."
And this:
"Upon review of the Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange, which is part of the National Agricultural Library, the Department of Agriculture was unable to find any reference to the military use of any herbicidal agents, including Agents Orange and Blue, at Fort Jackson during the moving party's period of service. The motion for reversal or revision of the May 3, 2011 Board decision finding that the moving party was not entitled to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type 2, claimed as due to exposure to herbicides, is denied." 
Young's "expertise" on the Agent Orange topic was frequently cited in BVA denials:
"The RO associated with the record a February 2014 report entitled "Investigation into the Environmental Fate of TCDD/Dioxin" that listed Dr. Alvin L. Young as the primary author (the "February 2014 Report"). According to the attached biography, Dr. Young completed his PhD in herbicide physiology and environmental toxicology in 1968, and since then, has amassed more than 300 publications in the scientific literature, including five books on issues related to Agent Orange and/or dioxin. "
But neither the regional office claims adjudicators, nor the BVA, or even the US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims bother to report the full story about Young, his 2006 report, or relationship to Sampsel. The Young-VA-Agent Orange story includes many revealing points:
1. Young's work supports VA positions disputing Agent Orange exposure and harmful effects
2. Young famously wrote that Agent-Orange-exposed vets were"trash-haulers, freeloaders looking for a tax-free dollar from a sympathetic congressman. I have no respect."
3. Even Young agrees his 2006 report was inadequate, however he didn't do this until he sought yet another VA contract to update it. In other words, his report was okay unless he could make more money
4. As for money, Young agreed he's made "millions" writing reports for the VA and DOD. He also got a $600,000 no-bid-sole source contract mostly directed against C-123 veterans' claims
5. Even while under VA contract at $26,000/month, Young wrongly insisted he wasn't representing VA when he appeared before the National Academy of Medicine to oppose C-123 claims while also failing to reveal his contract and close coordination with VA for input to the Academy. Fortunately, the Academy found that his work, and other from VA and DOD, has been found to be incomplete and also it wrongly minimized veterans' harmful AO exposure risks
My advice to every vet whose claim was denied citing Young's report: appeal based on the now-established fact that the 2006 Young report has been found flawed.

official photo from AFPMB newsletter
Back to the GAO report itself. One key finding was that DOD, sponsor of Young's 2006 report, agreed that the report was flawed but couldn't identify any process to improve it. I'm reminded of my frequent requests to both DOD and VA to help add C-123 spray aircraft to the list, but each agency refused. DOD said it was VA's duty, VA said they simply used what DOD provided and couldn't change anything. My letters to the Armed Forces Pest Management Board, where Young has lectured, were met with refusals to get involved. Interestingly, even though Young has (or had) contracts with the AFPMB as recently as 2017, nothing about him is found in AFPMB files. Guess they don't read their own official newsletter–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––>

My 2013 letters to LtGen Judith Fedder, DCS/Logistics, Installations & Mission Support, were similarly rebuffed. She answered,











Very disappointing. Especially so, reading in the November 2018 GAO report that DOD finally has agreed.

Below: The GAO report's six key conclusions:
The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment assigns responsibility for 
ensuring that DOD’s list of locations where Agent Orange or its 
components were tested and stored is as complete and accurate as 
available records allow. (Recommendation 1) 
The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of
 
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment develops a process for
updating 
the revised list as new information becomes available.
(Recommendation
 2)  
The Secretary of Defense, in collaboration with the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs, should develop clear and transparent criteria for what constitutes 
a location that should be included on the list of testing and storage 
locations. (Recommendation 3) 
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in collaboration with the Secretary of 
Defense, should develop clear and transparent criteria for what 
constitutes a location that should be included on the list of testing and 
storage locations. (Recommendation 4)

The Secretary of Defense, in collaboration with the Secretary of Veterans
 
Affairs, should develop a formal process for coordinating on how best to 
communicate information to veterans and the public regarding where 
Agent Orange was known to have been present outside of Vietnam. 
(Recommendation 5)

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in collaboration with the Secretary of
 
Defense, should develop a formal process for coordinating on how best to 
communicate information to veterans and the public regarding where 
Agent Orange was known to have been present outside of Vietnam. 
(Recommendation 6)


30 October 2016

SMSGT DICK HASKINS DIED OCTOBER 26, 2016

Senior Master Sergeant Richard Haskins, USAF Retired, was born on April 8, 1936 and passed away on Wednesday, October 26, 2016.

SMSGT Haskins was a resident of Longmeadow, Massachusetts at the time of his passing.

Richard was a graduate of W. Bridgewater H.S.

Richard served his country proudly with the US Air Force and made a career with the Dept. of Defense for 35 years. He served his country proudly with the US Air Force and made a career as an Air Reserve Technician for 35 years. He served during the Korean, Vietnam, and Desert Storm wars. After active duty he enlisted with the US Air Force Reserves and received numerous medals awards and citations.

Dick was a flight examiner with the 74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, Westover AFB, MA and one of the most experienced aeromedical evacuation technicians.

He was married to Barbara.

Relatives and friends may gather with his family during calling hours on Friday Nov. 4 2016 from 11:00 to 1:00 followed by a Memorial Service with Pastor Barry Andrusik officiating at Browne Memorial Funeral Chapels Enfield CT. Interment with military honors will then take place in the Massachusetts Veteran�s Memorial Cemetery in Agawam MA.

In lieu of flowers the family has requested memorial donations in his memory be made to the Dana Farber Cancer Institute P.O. Box 849168 Boston MA 02284-9168.

23 July 2016

Lt Col Ed Kosakoski Passed Friday, July 22

My former commanding officer and best man at my wedding has died.

Lieut. Col. Ed Kosakowski passed away Friday evening after a long battle with Alzheimer's and other ailments. Ingrid called with the sad news. Arrangements thus far are for services to be on August 1 including graveside military honors. I will post more here as I get news.

Ed's long service to the country began as an army private. He advanced to master sergeant and then joined the Air Force.  He was eventually commissioned as a Medical Service Corps officer. Ed's civilian career was as a pharmacist followed by civil service as an air reserve technician. His last assignment was as commander of the 74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, Westover Air Force Base Massachusetts.

There are a great number of Air Force officers grateful to "Colonel K" for his influence on our careers. So many squadron NCOs were commissioned under his leadership that we jokingly called his efforts "Colonel K's OCS."

Ed married Ingrid and they had one son, Eddie Junior. Both Eddie Junior and Ingrid showed their lasting love for Ed in caring for him during these last difficult years.

Ed happened to be the first C-123 veteran awarded VA benefits in mid 2015 once our battle to win Agent Orange benefits finally succeeded.

God bless the family.

03 June 2015

Active Duty, Reserve Duty, AFTP & LEGAL Veteran Status...what's all the confusion?

It's important. The VA operates under laws which permit and require it to do different things and fundamental to the Department of Veterans Affairs is the legal definition of veteran which is carefully defined in the law. (click for just who is a veteran.)

It's complicated, as well as important. Throughout most laws dealing with the Department of Veterans Affairs the term "veteran" is used, rather than a less specific "servicemember" or similar word. Thus, what makes a C-123 aircrew or maintenance Reservist a veteran is important.

The first lesson we learned is that once earned, a person is a veteran forever. The next lesson we learned is that the first lesson is untrue.

It turns out that one is a veteran for issues dealing with the particular time period of an injury or illness only if veteran status is earned at that time. Thus, we may have been Vietnam veterans (many were) and/or Gulf War veterans (many were) or both, but still were probably not veterans in the full legal sense during the period we flew the C-123s unless we somehow qualified during those years of 1972-1986 (yes, VA extended the time period per Rickenbacker's years.)

How could we have earned veteran status while flying in the Reserves? The usual ways...active duty for a period of time, an injury or illness with line of duty determination, but without satisfying the legal requirements DURING THE TIME WE FLEW/MAINTAINED THE C-123s, we are not legal veterans for purposes of veterans' benefits sought for whatever happened during those Reserve years.

I'll give my case as an example. I'm a traditional Reservist with prior Army Reserve time and AF enlisted time before commissioning, and activated during the Gulf War. Thus I'm a legal veteran. I was injured during the Gulf War and am now 100% service connected. BUT...still not a veteran for the time 1974-1980 that I flew the C-123s?

Except: In 1978 I had surgery to sever nerves to my left thigh to stop a mysterious burning sensation. If VA ever agrees, this means I had the qualifying illness or injury during my Reserve years associated with Agent Orange because that sensation is now called "peripheral neuropathy, one of the Agent Orange presumptive illnesses. If VA doesn't agree, then I'm a vet per the Gulf War and forever after, but not a vet for purposes of Agent Orange exposure during our C-123 years.

Why bring my own ailments into the conversation? To illustrate that we're all different, and that we'll be treated as different individuals under the VA's final rules for C-123 VETERANS. Also because I can just imagine somebody trying to tell Big John Harris he's not actually a veteran...not of the C-123 era, yet.

The language VA has given the White House to cover our new rule is "Presumption of Herbicide Exposure and Presumption of Disability During Service For Reservists Presumed Exposed to Herbicide." Given all the preparation for this, we shouldn't have to presume any problem getting their program for us into action.

The White House Office of Management and Budget, which has to approve the language used in the new rule, has had it under review since May 13, but for some reason (we trust, not a deception of any sort) the abstract of the rule hasn't been posted so we don't know the details. It had better include retroactivity as we are simply not going to leave our widows and widowers behind on this, nor the folks who've had claims in for so many years. Those were flaws in the VA's proposed legislation which we opposed so loudly in April, and I don't expect that VA will do an end run this time.

Questions on my mind:
• Does this make us veterans under the law for the time period involved, or just convey parallel benefits to others with Agent Orange illnesses? Important for many reasons, for instance, many states offer disabled veterans benefits only to those the VA has rated as disabled veterans...any other status will leave us at a disadvantage.
• Will our families needing it receive CHAMP-VA medical benefits?
• C-123 claims are to be forwarded to St Paul VA for specialized handling by subject matter experts. Will this slow down claims? What about denied claims, and those in BVA appeals? We have asked that there be a fast track on getting these claims processed, and asked that appeals and denied claims not yet appealed be given quick Decision Review Officer examination rather than wait the years required for BVA processing and the inevitable remand.
• Will we have any opportunity for input? So far, no communications since the April 16 meeting at the Senate Russell building with VA Office of General Counsel, Senate and House advocates and veterans service organizations. We're in the dark with lots at stake.

05 March 2015

My Agent Orange Claim: Four Years Old This Month

VA Claim still denied after four years waiting!
2011 just wasn't a super year for me, health-wise.

2011 also proved to be a terrible year to submit an Agent Orange claim. But as it worked out, that frustrated claim afforded me a tremendous sense of purpose in helping the men and women I served with between 1974-1980. I guess it was one path to acceptance of what was happening to me.

2011 is when I learned I had cancer and heart disease, and had heart surgery in Portland Oregon. As I learned more about my illnesses, I realized that other folks from our squadron were in the same predicament: I had the thought that information uncovered by preparing my claim would help the men and women I flew with who'd also been exposed.

2011 is thus when I began more active interaction with the Department of Veterans Affairs. In addition to being asked why I was submitting a disability claim when I was already rated 100% disabled, it also earned me the wrath of VA staff, which labeled me "persistent" and "adept at gathering legislative influence." Perhaps.

My wife and I talked it over and agreed it was a worthwhile family commitment for our time and money. I'd been a Medical Service Corps officer in the Air Force for years and a medic before that, a little background which might help. Back then, I didn't expect this project to take four years, but neither did I expect to be around this long.

Soon after I was diagnosed, I submitted a disability claim to the Portland VA for these recognized Agent Orange illnesses.

Four years on, even with each requirement in VA's regulation VAM21-1MR satisfied, even with JSRRC and IOM confirmation, it remains denied by the VA. It moves along, if indeed it moves at all, with the same glacial pace as with all other veterans' claims. It is in line for eventual consideration by the Board of Veterans Appeals, although it hasn't even been forwarded to the BVA but instead has sat for two years at the Portland VARO: BVA appeals can take three to five years, longer than the remaining lifespan of many veterans awaiting decisions.

Adjudication by the BVA takes only a few months once it has the claim. The longest part of the appeals delay is simply the years each regional office takes to putting a disputed claim in the mail for that hearing.

Claims sit in stacks, either physical or digital, for years. VA rules prohibit treating veterans' ailments, regardless of how life-threatening, during those years until the claim is decided. There is such a backlog of BVA appeals that the local office can't offer a guess as to when the claim might be heard.

Despite the unresolved claim for my Agent Orange-related illness, other injuries happen to provide my eligibility for VA care.  I am something of an exception among Reservists from this era. Like other veterans of the Gulf War or other conflicts, my own medical needs are already met by VA, TriCare and MediCare. After my injury, I was 100% medically retired from the Air Force as well.

Because I'm already 100% VA service-connected, rated "catastrophically disabled" by VA and eligible for all VA care, outstanding treatment is provided for my Agent Orange-related illnesses as well as all other ailments. However, most of my crewmates aren't able to turn to the VA for anything, and even their Agent Orange claims are refused...every single one of them. Working my claim, and discovering everything necessary to win VA's approval for our Agent Orange-related claims, would help our other C-123 veterans experiencing illnesses recognized as associated with toxin exposures.

I substantiated my own VA claim not only with the required medical evidence, but also proof of the exposure event because it was unusual:  Many of my squadron's C-123 transports were used for spraying Agent Orange in Vietnam. My claim was that, although I didn't serve in Vietnam, I was exposed via inhalation, dermal contact and ingestion routes of exposure to herbicide residue in the airplane.

Also submitted was USAF proof that planes from our squadron was tested "heavily contaminated with dioxin (the toxin in Agent Orange, also referred to as TCDD) on all test surfaces." That proof wasn't easily gathered from the Air Force...requests for it were denied for years until partially released under the Freedom of Information Act. But only partially. It has taken a suit in federal court to get even a fraction of the information about our exposures released. For some reason, these USAF documents often have hundreds of pages completely redacted...information about our health kept from us.

VA was prepared for claims from veterans with non-Vietnam exposure events – that is, prepared to deny. However, VA also took pains three different times to clearly ("clearly" was the word VA used) spell out to Congress and the public through the Federal Register the department's commitment to care for those exposed outside Vietnam with the same presumptive service connection as Vietnam's "boots on the ground" vets. VA subsequent actions in denying all such claims was in conflict with law, VA regulations, ethical standards it set for itself, and commitments made to veterans and Congress.

Expecting that I'd have a difficult time submitting the claim and persuading the VA, I sought confirmation of both the contamination of the airplanes and the harm that exposure caused, these being VA's requirements in VAM21-1MR. The Center for Disease Control evaluated Air Force source documents and then provided expert input from its Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

The CDC reported that our airplanes were contaminated and our exposures well beyond safety standards. The extra information that cancer risks were increased by 186-fold was what I found staggering. CDC said our C-123s were so contaminated we should have been flying and maintaining them in full HAZMAT.

All these proofs...nearly one hundred, didn't help the claim one bit. The claim was denied in 2012. VA disputed or ignored all the medical and scientific support. VA's Compensation and Pension service even took pains to somehow falsely summarize the CDC confirmation of my exposure with their sentence, "In summary, there is no conclusive evidence of TCDD exposure causing any adverse health effects."  

Clear? CDC said I was exposed with a 200-fold increased cancer risk, but VA denied the claim because TCDD is harmless. TCDD? That's the most toxic of toxins, and universally recognized, even by VA, as a human carcinogen. TCDD is the contaminant that made much of the Agent Orange used in Vietnam into a poison.

VA dismissed all the scientific evidence, stating VA had an "overwhelming preponderance of evidence" against my claim. And also, dismissed every C-123 veteran's claim. VA raters also denied C-123 veterans' claims by using the phrase, "regulations forbid recognizing non-Vietnam herbicide exposures." There are no such regulations, of course as VA later agreed when challenged.

In response, VA simply told raters to deny claims but using other phrases, directing all C-123 claims denied regardless of any evidence. This is according to the director of Compensation and Pension in Veterans Benefits Administration. Meeting with him in 2012, we were told no amount of proof from whatever source would permit a claim to be approved.

Denying a claim by pretending TCDD was somehow harmless meant VA denied an Agent Orange claim under the 1991 Agent Orange Act, because Agent Orange was harmless. VA's position was the toxin in Agent Orange causes no adverse health effects, so my claim for illnesses recognized by VA as Agent Orange-presumptive illnesses was denied because toxins in Agent Orange are harmless.

VA's twisting logic and proof makes my head spin. Even VA executives later reported the language denying my claim was "an unfortunate choice of words." What they meant was that the claim had to be denied whatever the reason VA could create, but some other reason should have been found...anything, just get the claim denied regardless of supporting evidence. Type anything, be creative, but deny the claim.

VA's "overwhelming preponderance of evidence" against my claim actually turned out to be a staffers' phrase describing two letters (one from a Dow-sponsored scientist and one from a Monsanto-sponsored scientist, neither of whom ever reviewed my claim,) plus a VA contractor who explains that Agent Orange is harmless. Frequently in VA's internal communications, that phrase was tossed out so routinely everyone in the department came to accept it as a settled fact. The characterization of VA's meager amount of contrary materials as an "overwhelming preponderance of evidence" doomed C-123 claims for years.

But there was no such preponderance: What little VA had paled in comparison to the veterans' evidence. VA even cited its own web pages as scientific evidence to belittle veterans' claims – part of that non-existent overwhelming preponderance.

VA staffers at the "Agent Orange desk" in Compensation and Pension were personally determined to prevent any non-Vietnam exposure claims such as ours. "We have to draw the line somewhere," VA leaders informed the Associated Press. No mention was made of the law, or VA's own regulations which should have insured approval of claims from C-123 veterans.

When other agencies such as DOD's Joint Services Records Research Center tried to provide VA persuasive source documents about C-123 exposures, VA refused to accept them, blocking JSRRC support of the veterans' claims. VA even refused to accept findings from the CDC/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry confirmed by Rear Admiral R. Ikeda, MD US Public Health Service, calling such evidence from other federal agencies the real problem and "unfortunate."

So, four years ago VA's imaginary "preponderance of evidence" was used to deny evidence from dozens of scientists and physicians, as well as confirming opinions about my exposure from CDC, US Public Health Service and the National Institutes of Health.

All of it from unpaid experts, stacks of it, but useless against VA's two letters, its Agent Orange consultant, and staff preferences.

It was this unofficial policy of some staffers in VA's benefits organization, not law nor science, which condemned every C-123 claim and denied benefits due these veterans. But the arguments from veterans continued, amplified by media, scientific evidence, peer-reviewed research and legislative attention.

Finally in 2014 the National Institutes of Health gave an in-depth evaluation of all the science and evidence regarding the C-123 airplanes' contamination and exposure of the veterans who flew and maintained them. The final report: C-123 veterans were exposed. VA was wrong all along.

In the near future VA will announce changes in how it handles C-123 veterans' claims. Probably, VA will more properly follow its own rules and regulations which should have protected these veterans all along. But between 2011 and March of 2015, VA staffers insured a 100% denial rate of claims which should have been approved. The veterans have paid for these failures at the VA, not the staffers who did this to us.

I've been privileged, and grateful, to be a VA patient since 1991 after I was injured in the line of duty. But had I not been eligible for VA care, as with C-123 veterans' whose claims for Agent Orange benefits are still denied here's just some of the care I received but would have been denied between 2011 and 2015:
Heart surgery, cataract surgery, two shoulder surgeries, two hip surgeries, infection control, wound clinic, colonoscopy, pharmacy, cancer care, specialty clinics, rehabilitation, prosthetics, counseling, nose surgery, throat surgery, wheelchairs, allowances to replace clothing damaged by my wheelchair, inhalation therapy/sleep studies and CPAP machine,  immunizations, dental surgery, independent living assistance, imaging, corrective footwear, glasses, hearing aids, VA home loan, monthly compensation, state tax benefits, automobile registration fee waiver, home health care, travel allowances, primary medical care, biopsies and other pathology/laboratory care, and more.
Without my other military injuries to qualify me for all this care, I'd be outside the VA hospital with my finger stuck to their door bell, trying to get in but their door still locked. I might have found vital care elsewhere, but at my own expense.

That's the situation still faced by my fellow C-123 veterans. Unlike me, blessed as I am by all the medical care I've had between 2011 and 2015, my friends are still denied all VA medical care because VA has that non-existent  "overwhelming preponderance of evidence," Fortunately it has been dismissed by the National Academy of Sciences, CDC, NIH, VA physicians, US Public Health Service and dozens of physicians and scientists, plus peer-reviewed scientific articles.

Legal scholars in Yales' Veterans Law Clinic examined the legal situation and affirmed the C-123 veterans' eligibility for presumptive service connection per VA rules and the 1991 Agent Orange Law.

Still, four years after submitting my own Agent Orange claim, it remains, like every other C-123 claim, ordered denied by VA's Compensation and Pension Service. Although the VA promises a "case by case evaluation," the fact is that promise only means a case by case denial of all such claims. So much for Due Process guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.

These next few weeks seem likely to bring at least some changes to VA's treatment of C-123 veterans' claims, blessings long overdue. VA provides compensation for service-related injuries and illnesses, and claims denied can be back-dated and often lost compensation eventually recovered.

What cannot be recovered, however, are the costs associated with medical care denied by VA and obtained by C-123 veterans during these four years. Worse, there can be no recovery of the medical care refused, care never received even outside the VA system, for want of coverage. I know I wouldn't be alive today without the care I've received for my Agent Orange-related illnesses from the VA, care provided not because I am an Agent Orange veteran but because I'm a Gulf War veteran.

That's fine for me even with my Agent Orange claim denied these last four years, but a disaster for my C-123 crewmates left untreated by the VA.

We're counting on VA making this mess right, thanks to senior leadership, the National Academy of Sciences, our legislators and dozens of scientists and physicians who so generously offered their expertise.