If you are anywhere near the Air Heritage Museum on April 30, stop there for great BBQ, see Thunder Pig, and help keep this last C-123 flying.
[T]he government’s interest in veterans cases is not that it shall win, but rather that justice shall be done, that all veterans so entitled receive the benefits due to them.” Barrett v. Nicholson, 466 F.3d 1038, 1044 (Fed.Cir.2006)
Showing posts with label aircraft. Show all posts
Showing posts with label aircraft. Show all posts
09 April 2016
23 June 2015
VA Web Pages Dealing With C-123 Changes
Current VA C-123 web pages...obviously changing as Friday's new rule covering presumptive eligibility gets circulated and VA staff are trained.
www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/locations/residue-c123-aircraft/scientific-review.asp
Scientific Review of Agent Orange in C-123 Aircraft Public Health Scientific Review of Agent Orange in C-123 Aircraft VA asked the Institute
www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/locations/residue-c123-aircraft
in adverse health effects in C-123 crew members. IOM released its report, Post-Vietnam Dioxin Exposure in Agent Orange-Contaminated C-123 Aircraft,
www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/publications/institute-of-medicine.asp
and herbicide use. Recent reports IOM released Post-Vietnam Dioxin Exposure in Agent Orange-Contaminated C-123 Aircraft on Jan. 9, 2015. VA has
www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/locations
in the Vietnam War Possible exposure of crew members to herbicide residue in C-123 planes flown after the Vietnam War
www.blogs.va.gov...xposed-to-contaminated-c-123-aircraft
C-123 aircraft VA expands disability benefits for Air Force personnel exposed to contaminated C-123 aircraft Media Relations 5 Posted on Thursday,
www.va.gov/opa/pressrel/pressrelease.cfm?id=2714
to herbicide exposure on C-123s may call VA s special C-123 Hotline at 1-800-749-8387 (available 8 a.m. 9 p.m. EST) or e-mail VSCC123.VAVBASPL
www.benefits.va.gov/benefits/factsheets.asp
2015 Top Veterans with Service-Connected Disabilities Automobile and Special Adaptive Equipment Grants Download Posted 02/2015 C-123 Aircraft
www.benefits.va.gov/compensation/claims-postservice-agent_orange.asp
were tested and stored outside of Vietnam. Veterans who were crew members on C-123 planes flown after the Vietnam War. Veterans associated with
www.blogs.va.gov/vantage/319/the-way-we-see-it
7 views VA expands disability benefits for Air Force personnel exposed to contaminated C-123 aircraft Posted on Jun 18, 2015 June 18, 2015 5 comments
www.blogs.va.gov/vantage/17744/10-things-every-veteran-know-agent-orange
countries Agent Orange Residue on Airplanes Used in Vietnam War Possible exposure of crew members to herbicide residue in c-123 planes flown after the war
www.va.gov/opa/pressrel
VA Expands Disability Benefits for Air Force Personnel Exposed to Contaminated C-123 Aircraft The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) today
22 July 2013
VA Challenge: Show VA MILITARY Proof That Vets Flew Contaminated C-123s?
The question keeps coming up...and we keep answering it. YES! You want proof???
1. YES. There is military documentation firmly establishing the necessary proof of the C-123s in our unit being former Ranch Hand spray aircraft.
2. YES. There is military documentation firmly establishing the necessary proof of the C-123s in our unit, particularly Tail #362 (Patches) and the others, at last five, being contaminated with dioxin (Agent Orange.)
3. YES. There is military documentation firmly establishing the necessary proof of our aircrews flying C-123s specifically identified as former Ranch Hand spray aircraft.
Here are the three answers for the important question, last raised by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on June 7 2013 in his letter to Senator Burr, in which the Secretary wrote:
nearly all C-123 aircraft from manufacture and sale to the Air Force, and has identified which of them by specific tail number was modified for aerial spray operations and used for Operation Ranch Hand, spraying Agent Orange in Vietnam. Further, they identified which of the three post-Vietnam USAF squadrons had which former spray aircraft. Tail numbers and units to which the aircraft were assigned were reconfirmed by HQ Air Force Reserve Command.
2. For Westover veterans, the most heavily tested C-123 is Tail #362 (Patches, mentioned by the Secretary) now at the Air Force Museum. Its first test confirming military herbicides was in 1979, and a more comprehensive series of tests by AF toxicologists in 1994 confirmed the aircraft was "heavily contaminated on all test surfaces" and "a danger to public health." None of the other former spray planes were tested so thoroughly, and because they've been destroyed as toxic waste no testing can be done any longer. Documentation released by AFMC showed 1996 testing of 17 aircraft reported all 17 positive for dioxin contamination.
There is every scientific and logical reason to conclude the other aircraft were similarly contaminated, especially as Patches ceased spraying Agent Orange years before the other aircraft when it was switched to malathion missions, thus the other C-123s had "fresher" dioxin.
3. Air Force aviators are provided tracking of their flying activities via a "Form 5" which reports the individual's name, crew position, date and time of the mission, type of mission, and tail number flown. Thus, veterans who flew Patches will have a Form 5 showing their name and Tail #362. In the decades since the C-123 was flown, very few veterans will have saved paperwork dating back over four decades. Veterans have been gathering available Form 5s and flight orders. Flight orders do not show a tail number but they list the crew members for the flight. Matching names on Form 5s and names on flight orders satisfies Air Force archivists requirements for documenting any individual's flight activities.
So there is no question. All three parts of the Secretary's question are addressed with military documentation adequate to convince any jurist or archivist. If some VA officials remain unconvinced, it is because they are deliberately looking away from the proof and are dedicated to wrongly preventing our veterans' access to vital medical care.
1. YES. There is military documentation firmly establishing the necessary proof of the C-123s in our unit being former Ranch Hand spray aircraft.
2. YES. There is military documentation firmly establishing the necessary proof of the C-123s in our unit, particularly Tail #362 (Patches) and the others, at last five, being contaminated with dioxin (Agent Orange.)
3. YES. There is military documentation firmly establishing the necessary proof of our aircrews flying C-123s specifically identified as former Ranch Hand spray aircraft.
Here are the three answers for the important question, last raised by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on June 7 2013 in his letter to Senator Burr, in which the Secretary wrote:
"VA does not currently have a method of determining if a Veteran claiming stateside AO exposure was flying on one of the Operation Ranch Hand C-123s or one of the many other post-Vietnam C-123s flown stateside during the 1970s and 1980s."1. The USAF Historical Records Research Agency, Maxwell AFB AL, has identified the histories of
nearly all C-123 aircraft from manufacture and sale to the Air Force, and has identified which of them by specific tail number was modified for aerial spray operations and used for Operation Ranch Hand, spraying Agent Orange in Vietnam. Further, they identified which of the three post-Vietnam USAF squadrons had which former spray aircraft. Tail numbers and units to which the aircraft were assigned were reconfirmed by HQ Air Force Reserve Command.2. For Westover veterans, the most heavily tested C-123 is Tail #362 (Patches, mentioned by the Secretary) now at the Air Force Museum. Its first test confirming military herbicides was in 1979, and a more comprehensive series of tests by AF toxicologists in 1994 confirmed the aircraft was "heavily contaminated on all test surfaces" and "a danger to public health." None of the other former spray planes were tested so thoroughly, and because they've been destroyed as toxic waste no testing can be done any longer. Documentation released by AFMC showed 1996 testing of 17 aircraft reported all 17 positive for dioxin contamination.
There is every scientific and logical reason to conclude the other aircraft were similarly contaminated, especially as Patches ceased spraying Agent Orange years before the other aircraft when it was switched to malathion missions, thus the other C-123s had "fresher" dioxin.
3. Air Force aviators are provided tracking of their flying activities via a "Form 5" which reports the individual's name, crew position, date and time of the mission, type of mission, and tail number flown. Thus, veterans who flew Patches will have a Form 5 showing their name and Tail #362. In the decades since the C-123 was flown, very few veterans will have saved paperwork dating back over four decades. Veterans have been gathering available Form 5s and flight orders. Flight orders do not show a tail number but they list the crew members for the flight. Matching names on Form 5s and names on flight orders satisfies Air Force archivists requirements for documenting any individual's flight activities.
So there is no question. All three parts of the Secretary's question are addressed with military documentation adequate to convince any jurist or archivist. If some VA officials remain unconvinced, it is because they are deliberately looking away from the proof and are dedicated to wrongly preventing our veterans' access to vital medical care.
19 June 2011
Open Letter - Request for Help from Institute of Medicine Agent Orange Committee
To: Doctor Richard Fenske, Chair and (in turn) Dr Erin Bell, Dr Scott Burchiel, Dr Janice Chambers, Dr Naihua Duan, Dr Peter Gann, Dr Mark Goldberg, Dr Nancy Kerkvliet, Dr Stephen Kritchevsky, Dr Michele Marcus, Dr Linda McCauley, Dr Alvaro Puga, Dr Jeremy Shefner and Dr Hollie Swanson
Dear Members of the Committee,
On behalf of Colonel Arch Battesta, Colonel Ken Wheeler, Colonel Joseph Curley, Lieutenant Colonel Paul Bailey, Lieutenant Colonel Bob Karpinski, Lieutenant Colonel John Harris, Chief Master Sergeant Charles Fusco, Major Al Harrington, Major Gale Harrington, Brigadier General Mike Walker, Major Stephen Clancey, Master Sergeant Steve Caraker, Master Sergeant George Gadbois, the late Master Sergeant Bob Boyd, Colonel Dee Holiday, Lieutenant Colonel Gail Sorenson and her late husband Lieutenant Colonel Art Sorenson, Lieutenant Colonel Ed Kosakoski, our families and an estimated 500 others similarly situated,
We seek the emergency assistance from the Committee in the form of your recommendation to the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense that the dioxin-contaminated aircraft we flew be designated Agent Orange-contaminated sites. Each of the aircraft we seek to have so designated can be identified by historical records, contamination surveys and physical presence of Agent Orange spray apparatus. Agent Orange toxins remained in each of these aircraft until they were destroyed in 2010.
In 1972 the Air Force Reserve began flying the C-123K/UC-123K “Provider” aircraft previously used for Agent Orange spray missions in Vietnam. Dioxin contamination persisted on these aircraft, at least eleven of which were assigned to the squadrons we flew with. Numerous tests by the Air Force in 1993 and later established the harmful levels of dioxin contamination remaining on the surplus aircraft, all then retired after ten years of our use flying missions worldwide. Military concern about the established contamination led the decontamination by destruction of the remaining aircraft by melting them into scrap metal ingots. Air Force and GSA testimony before a federal judge on a 2000 private lawsuit had the aircraft described as “extremely hazardous”, “extremely contaminated” and “extremely dangerous.”
Veterans who flew the Provider during the years we did not suspect its contamination later turned to the Department of the Air Force to help identify the aircrews and maintenance personnel so they could be notified of their likely exposure to dioxin, but the Air Force responded they lacked the ability to identify the personnel involved. Earlier, for some reason, The Air Force Judge Advocate General responsible for the Office of Environmental Law (and her supervisor) recommended restricting information about the aircraft contamination to "within official channels," perhaps appropriately concerned with the reaction of exposed aircrews.
Speaking personally, this writer would have been concerned, but if I'd been alerted in 1996 when this JAG officer's recommendation was made, I would perhaps have better responded before my cancer, heart attack, heart surgery, diabetes and peripheral neuropathy surfaced in a two month period sixteen years later. I had surgeries for acute peripheral neuropathy, an Agent Orange-presumptive illness, in 1975 and 1976, following my assignment to fly the C-123K.UC-123K starting in 1974. Certainly, what health precautions I would have taken should have been my decision to make, not her decision to keep me from knowing about.
Our group of veterans submitted the several Air Force test results to the Oregon Health Sciences University with the question…"does the dioxin contamination shown on the aircraft tests equate to exposure to dioxin by the aircrews and maintenance workers assigned to those aircraft between 1972-1982?" The OSHU responded “Most Likely”.
Anecdotal sworn testimony from experienced maintenance workers in the 901st OMS establishes the intense effort after Vietnam to scrape the remaining Agent Orange residue from the aircraft, especially the sub-belly and wing interior sections, with DOD advice being that the residue was harmless and remove the residue and reduce the foul odors to scrape the residue with putty knives, then wash with Dawn dish soap and rinse thoroughly. Yet still, twenty and thirty years after the last Agent Orange spray missions, the aircraft tested in the Air Force words “extremely hazardous”, "extremely dangerous" and "heavily contaminated."
We earnestly seek the Committee’s immediate help. There is no controversy regarding the Air Force’s own tests establishing the presence of harmful levels of contaminants on our airplanes, and there is no controversy regarding eleven of our squadron’s 26 aircraft having been used for Agent Orange spray missions. The OSHU concludes that our exposure while flying and maintaining these toxic aircraft was “most likely” to have occurred. There is no hypothetical situation here...no question about whether we could have been exposed hundreds of miles out at sea or thousands of feet aloft...we point to the multitude of Air Force tests which establish our intense and intimate contact with this contaminated airplane, to the OSHU study, to your own common sense.
We don’t know your procedures or guidelines, but as a small group of veterans with a non-controversial argument for having been exposed to dioxin, we seek your help in whatever manner appropriate, so long as it is soon enough to help our sick veterans seek care through the Department of Veterans Affairs. If you have a different procedure to seek your help, tell me how to proceed. If you are organizationally restricted from what we request, what other help can you give us?
Hopefuly and Respectfully,
For the C-123K/UC-123K Veterans of 1972-1982
Wesley T. Carter, Major, USAF Retired
www.c123kcancer.blogspot.com
email: rustsilverwings@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)