USAF SURGEON GENERAL STAFF CONFIRM POST-VIETNAM C-123 AGENT ORANGE EXPOSURES "WITHIN THE EXPOSURES EXPERIENCED BY RANCH HAND PERSONNEL...IN VIETNAM"

Buried deep within a highly redacted Freedom of Information Act request submitted by the C-123 Veterans Association was a revealing admission from the Air Force Surgeon General: our aircrew and maintainers DID experience Agent Orange exposures, and the exposures were within the range experienced by Operation Ranch Hand veterans from the Vietnam War. 

The source was a memo dated April 23, 2012:

Bad enough but that was made worse by the decision not to inform the C-123 veterans of their potentially dangerous exposures from our 1972-1986 duties aboard the airplanes. Such a"heads-up" might have saved lives by alerting our vets to watch for health problems on the VA's list of Agent Orange illnesses.

This USAF Surgeon General's report dismissing veterans' concerns was created about six months after the CDC informed the VA and USAF that C-123 crews had been dangerously exposed, with a 200-fold greater risk of cancers. The USAF Surgeon General's office avoided comment on the CDC report, and did not respond to CDC when asked for further input and consultation.

This whole sad fiasco was a lost opportunity. It came during the years that Dr. Terry Walters (in Veterans Health Administration Public Health Post-Deployment Health) confirmed that she had specifically forbidden C-123 veterans from taking VA's Agent Orange Registry medical exam.

She and her colleagues were at this time redefining their unique and unscientific (according to other Federal health agencies) concept of exposure to prevent veterans' exposure claims. They presented it at the Society of Toxicology conference in September 2012.

This was nearly three years before the VA finally acknowledged C-123 veterans' Agent Orange exposures, five months after the Institute of Medicine's C-123 Agent Orange Report confirmed the exposures.

So many mistakes and even deceptions over this five-year struggle!

Seven Dates = years of VA blocking C-123 Agent Orange exposure claims

I'd like to put seven events before veterans, our legislators and the public to illustrate VBA's tortuous and wrong-headed struggle to prevent C-123 veterans' Agent Orange claims. VA dragged out justice for years, with acts I feel violated VA21-1MR, VA's pro-veteran duty, the VA duty to process claims in a non-adversarial manner, the Veterans Claims Assistance Act and the Due Process Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.

This is an important matter because VA's misdeeds denied our veterans up to $150,000 in retroactive compensation generally awarded other Agent Orange veterans once claims are resolved. Plus, C-123 vets were denied years of vital medical care. Important issue, because it shows VA disregard for its own regulations and obligation for a pro-veteran perspective.

1. VBA's Agent Orange desk repeatedly informs veterans that JSRRC confirmation is required to acknowledge claims, saying VA cannot act and citing VA21-1MR requirements for JSRRC report
2. March 12 2013: VBA Agent Orange desk receives JSRRC director's confirmation of evidence for C-123 Agent Orange exposure which cites numerous government records
3. March 12 2013: VBA and VHA discuss JSRRC confirmation in their internal communications, its role and its availability to veterans and whether it triggers presumptive service connection; decision to disregard as irrelevant (violates VCAA and Due Process at this point)
4. May 9 2013: Two months after JSRRC official confirmation, VBA corresponds with C-123 veterans informing them JSRRC confirmation is necessary but does not reveal JSRRC confirmation already received two months earlier
5. June 10 2013: VBA Agent Orange desk drafts letter for Under Secretary Hickey to Oregon Governor, avoids mention of JSRRC and other government proofs received by VA, cites non-existent "specific scientific investigation" (which was instead a VHA staff consensus...no scientific study was ever done) against C-123 claims
6. July 10 2013: Mr. John Kruse (Director Benefits Team VA Congressional and Legislative Liaison) submits detailed letter from C-123 veterans re: JSRRC, VCAA violations and other issues to Secretary Shinseki, without response
7. May 2014: VBA begins receiving individual veteran JSRRC confirmations in May 2014 but does not act or inform veterans, stating it will delay and, await the IOM study (which resulted in the June 2015 Interim Final Rule)

Net effect: eligible deserving veterans were denied VA medical care and other benefits for over four years following CDC, NIH and US Public Health Service confirmation of our exposures, and for over two years following DOD JSRRC confirmation of our exposures which satisfied the VA's own regulation VA21-1MR but which VA ignored, violating Veterans Claims Assistance Act and Due Process Clause.

Its Official: AF Fails to Notify Exposed C-123 Veterans

It is official. According to a 2012 HQ USAF Washington DC memo accompanying the US Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine paper addressing C-123 contamination, Major General Travis, Deputy Surgeon General of the Air Force decided NOT to notify exposed veterans of their decade of dioxin exposure!

The reason. Of course, it is not a cover up. Heaven forbid! We were not told about our 200 times greater risk of cancer, and dioxin exposure equal to or greater than Vietnam War ground troops, because the General felt it best, as he put it, " to avoid distress." He's a general, a physician and a Command Flight Surgeon, and flight surgeons are the flyers personal physician, so I know we can trust him!

Still, I am worried beyond measure these days. Perhaps if we'd been told to take normal dioxin-exposure precautions back in '94 when the Air Force confirmed our airplanes' contamination we could have taken precautions like monitoring PSA numbers and reducing fat intake. But, thanks to the General's concern about our stress levels, we lost the chance to observe those helpful steps.

Why can't I feel grateful for my unnecessary stress being spared me? General? Doc? What's the deal?

The General's letter and the AF Consultative Letter were initially only distributed to the VA, so I guess it was written to address the VA's needs, not the veterans. Certainly, the veterans are the only ones disserved, as the VA uses the letter as part of their justification for denying C-123 veterans' claims.