VA was wrong. Easy for the C-123 veterans to say this in 2015, but it takes a careful review of VA's documents over these past four years to see the determination, and the deception, with which our claims were greeted...and doomed to VBA's blanket denials.
In this August 2013 document, the conversation is about Paul Bailey's DRO decision awarding him service connection for C-123 Agent Orange exposure. The award came just before Paul's death, and VA actually considered overturning it from Washington!
To illustrate how deceptive or mistaken VA was over the years, I've placed red X's over statements now shown by events to be wrong. VA was wrong scientifically, wrong morally, wrong per VA's own VAM21-1MR, wrong per the Veterans Claims Assistance Act.
VA was wrong. Veterans were right and the IOM C-123 report finally established the fact, but we were left to pay the price for VA's knee-jerk "not on my watch" response to our Agent Orange exposure claims. It is wrong that VA made us prove that our aircraft were contaminated and we were exposed to Agent Orange aboard them.
VA fought everything about this for four years when it should have been fighting for us, seeking a way for our veterans to qualify for service connection for the typical Agent Orange-related illnesses.
Given the seriousness of VA forbidding access to its medical care and other veterans benefits, there is no excuse for any errors made by VA in coming to their position against us and their decision to deny all our claims. But look below and read how VA tried to justify itself for opposing C-123 veterans' claims, and from today's perspective see how wrong VA was in its facts..
If VA moves to refuse veterans vital medical care for cancers and other ailments, such a fateful decision must be based on a perfect grasp of all facts, and a preference to qualify vets for coverage if possible rather than construct false barriers to their claims.
Below, there are far too factual errors, too many red X's when there's no excuse for even one, yet VA pumped out inaccurate correspondence like this for four years. We have yet to uncover any effort during these 48 months for such mistakes to be corrected, but rather, mistakes were heaped together to form VA's opposition to C-123 veterans, one mistake upon another.
Showing posts with label bonamici. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bonamici. Show all posts
06 June 2015
27 April 2015
Today's Developments re: JSRRC C-123 Veterans' Agent Orange Exposure Claims – "The Rest of the Story!"
Our last post detailed the decision by the Huntington WV Veterans Affairs Regional Office in denying a C-123 veterans' claims for a variety of illnesses associated with his Agent Orange exposures at Westover AFB, MA. Huntington denied, citing the JSRRC report which detailed NO Agent Orange use at Westover AFB, MA.
Correct. But what Huntington failed to do was include the affirming language also in the JSRRC report which very much confirmed the veteran's exposure claim.
Get it? Huntington wanted the claim denied, so Huntington VARO carefully selected language (out of context) to cite refusing the claim, and also very carefully selected language they didn't want in the report, so as to make sure the claim was denied but looked as though the JSRRC report was in the negative.
Thank you, JSRRC, for clarifying this situation!!
Very creative. Very wrong. This must be corrected by Veterans Benefits Administration! Here is the language Huntington opted to skip over to screw the veteran:
Correct. But what Huntington failed to do was include the affirming language also in the JSRRC report which very much confirmed the veteran's exposure claim.
Get it? Huntington wanted the claim denied, so Huntington VARO carefully selected language (out of context) to cite refusing the claim, and also very carefully selected language they didn't want in the report, so as to make sure the claim was denied but looked as though the JSRRC report was in the negative.
Thank you, JSRRC, for clarifying this situation!!
Very creative. Very wrong. This must be corrected by Veterans Benefits Administration! Here is the language Huntington opted to skip over to screw the veteran:
22 December 2014
Congresswoman Bonamici Asked to Challenge VA Briefing to Her in 2013
![]() |
| VA brief to Congresswoman Bonamici, June 6, 2013 |
I would like to offer our C-123K VETERANS Association perspective on the briefing provided Congresswoman Bonamici by VA in October 2013. I believe it was an improper brief in that it failed to properly inform a member of Congress regarding a specific constituent as well as the larger group, the C-123 Veterans Association, about which she and her colleagues questioned the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. The VA brief was their response to the inquiry she put to the VA, dated October 23, 2013.
We sought Congresswoman Bonamici's help, not for any legislative relief, but rather asking her confrontation of VA over their failure to adhere to the law's requirements as well as VA's own as detailed in VA Manual M21-1MR. The Circuit Court ruled that VA's regulations "have the force of law." VA properly utilizes VAM21-1MR to obstruct claims lacking merit, but also ignores their regulation in the face of C-123 veterans' claims.
• (FYI this overall issue has been assigned Office of Special Counsel File No. DI-15-1441. Any input others may have for OSF can be submitted to investigators citing that reference.)
Although we were aware of Congresswoman Bonamici's inquiry to the VA, their response was only released to me by FOIA lawsuit last week, and was in the form of an email between Mr. Steve Westerfield of VA's Congressional Liaison and Mr. James Sampsel, dated apparently after the briefing.
Basically, VA's response was meant to be wholly negative, permitting no benefit of the doubt (of which there was and remains a great deal) to their official position obstructing C-123 veterans' Agent Orange exposure claims. VA failed to mention that its position is opposed by several other federal agencies, including those with regulatory and statutory authority in this area (although not as regards veterans benefits.) VA's briefing was an expression of policy and not a presentation of the true breadth of a contentious issue.
It is a most serious issue, affecting VA's decision to refuse medical care for veterans claiming, with expert support from other federal agencies, Agent Orange exposure aboard their former Agent Orange C-123 transports over a ten-year period. The predictable financial loss, suffering and deaths make this an issue of urgent concern to every Oregon citizen as well as our legislative representatives.
The inadequacy of the VA briefing should be seen in light of recent VA IG reports addressing VA's "Fact Sheet" reports. I suggest, although the conclusion should be the Congresswoman's, that the briefing was deceptive and policy-driven.
Strengthening our assertion that the VA opposition to our claims is improper is the reason VA Compensation and Pension Service has given for denying claims. The Director of that department, ordering a veteran's exposure claim denied, wrote, "In summary, there is no conclusive evidence that TCDD exposure causes any adverse health effects."
While that statement is scientifically flawed, and shown to be so even on VA web pages, denying claims which have awaited decision for over a year dooms the veterans to between three and four years in appeals to the Board of Veterans Appeals. Other VA executives, charged with challenging veterans' post-Vietnam exposure claims, actually told the Associated Press, "You have to draw the line somewhere." The same VA executive told staff members of Senator Richard Burr that VA could not permit any C-123 claim approvals.
Members of our association residing in Congressman Richard Neal's district have asked that he be invited to join Congresswoman Bonamici's inquiry. Congressman Neal's district includes Westover Air Reserve Base where most of the former Agent Orange spray planes were assigned and where the largest number of affected veterans still reside.
Among them is Master Sergeant Richard Matte. Under Secretary Hickey graciously intervened for VA's prompt reconsideration of Sergeant Matte's claim once she was informed of his heart transplant, loss of his left leg, and two massive heart attacks a couple months ago, leaving him gravely ill. Along with his other Agent Orange ailments, VA had refused every possible association of Sergeant Matte's ten years as an aircrew member aboard what Air Force toxicologists swore, under oath in federal court, were "highly contaminated on all test surfaces" and "a danger to public health.
The CDC in June advised the VA and USAF that Air Force test results made clear that aircrews and maintenance workers should actually have been flying in full HAZMAT protection, not simple cotton flight suits.
From VA's briefing to Congresswoman Bonamici, and Secretary Shinseki's response to Senator Richard Burr on the same topic, VA admits not an ounce of doubt in favor of the veterans' exposure claims. Tellingly, VA avoids mention of the fact that other federal agencies have affirmed the veterans' exposures. CDC, NIEHS, ATSDR, USPHS, NIH, the Concerned Scientists and Physicians...all oppose VA's position, and none of this expert opposition was mentioned to Congresswoman Bonamici. Neither did VA mention the fact that opinions from Dow and Monsanto helped form the VA position against the veterans' exposure harm.
May we have an opportunity to continue this conversation, in association with legislative representatives from Vietnam Veteran of America and the American Legion?
Attach:
Flawed VA C-123 Brief (internal VA summary dated Aug 2013)
C-123 Veterans Association analysis of VA Brief to Congresswoman Bonamici and her colleagues
25 April 2014
OPB Reported Eastern Oregon Agent Orange Toxins in 2012
Agent Orange Dump Site Is Oregon Desert’s Toxic Legacy
May 3, 2012 | OPB
A deal cut by the state with the foreign company that owns the
site has now been dropped. And the Department of Environmental Quality has no
plans – or money – to clean it up.
About 60 miles north of Lakeview a barbed wire fence surrounds a
patch of desert. Warning signs tell people to stay away.
Boyd Levet remembers watching in 1976 as the dump was created.
“It was probably just acres but it seemed like miles and miles
of barrels just lined up in rows. It was a sight you would not expect to see in
a place as beautiful as Oregon,” says Levet, who was a reporter back then for
KOIN-TV.
25,513 barrels containing more than 1 million gallons of
pesticide had been stacked next to Alkali Lake. They promptly started leaking.
Levet’s old news film shows the state of
Oregon sent in bulldozers. They didn’t just bury the drums. They crushed them,
allowing more toxics to pour out.
The chemicals include 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D – the
prime ingredients of Agent Orange –
notorious for its use during the Vietnam War.
Oregon’s Department of Environmental Quality pushed the
25-thousand crushed barrels in trenches, then shoved dirt on top.
The trenches were not lined.
The dioxin-laced pesticides quickly reached the water table
below, just 3- to 6-feet down.
Contaminated groundwater samples
“The groundwater near the landfill is very contaminated,” says
Bob Schwarz, DEQ’s current project manager over the Alkali Lake Disposal Site.
He adds:
“The chemicals caused the water to be a bright red color. Pretty
striking to see.”
The state has put up a fence around it. Tests have measured
contaminated ground water spreading nearly half a mile underground. The nearest
families live 3 miles away. And the town of Christmas Valley is about 30 miles
to the west.
“I would say if it was near any population center, even a town
as small as Christmas Valley it could very well have been declared a Superfund
site,” Schwarz says.
Former Lake County Commissioner J.R. Stewart is angry that the
state does not intend to clean up the chemical dumpsite.
“If it’s not affecting you it’s not a problem. Well, it’s
affecting Lake County,” he says. “It’s affecting the state of Oregon and it has
the potential, in time, to be a great effect and a danger. Why not remedy a
very bad situation as soon as possible, rather than turn a blind eye until you
absolutely get beat over the head and have to do it?”
Stewart has been to the site several times. He says he can still
smell the chemicals there. DEQ says those chemicals dissipate in the wind so
they are no hazard as long as people stay away.
A study for the EPA last
year found contaminated water reaching the surface in an area known as habitat
for the threatened western snowy plover. No studies have been done on whether
they have been affected.
The company that originally made the Agent Orange has been sold
several times since. The current owner is Bayer CropScience. In a written
statement, a company spokesman says that Bayer CropScience thought it had
reached “a fair and appropriate resolution” with DEQ in 2009.
The settlement did not address cleanup or future testing. Bayer
would have paid 700-thousand dollars towards the 2-million dollars taxpayers
have already spent fencing, burying and keeping tabs on the site. And if anyone
else sued, Bayer would have paid 20% while taxpayers would cover 80 percent of
litigation costs.
Lake County residents and officials filed objections, saying the
proposed settlement let the company off the hook.
“The chemical companies you’re talking about are multi-billion
dollar corporations. Come on,” Stewart says. “Let’s fight for what we know is
right and get it done.”
Late last year, without any public announcement, DEQ quietly
dropped the settlement. It has made no decision about pursuing the company. It
has no plans to clean up the site, which could cost hundreds of millions of
dollars.
24 October 2013
More: Congressional Support...or lack of it...for C-123 Veterans. Where is Rep. Neal?
![]() |
| Susanne Bonamici, D-OR |
Bonamici led a bipartisan effort in the House urging the VA to acknowledge C-123 veterans' exposure claims, submitting their letter to the Secretary on October 23, 2013.
A parallel Senate effort has been led by Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) and Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR).
A large squadron of the C-123 troop transports was stationed at Westover Air Reserve Base in Chicopee between 1972-1982. The C-123 was the aircraft used for spraying Agent Orange in Vietnam, and Air Force tests revealed in 1994 that 34 of the warplanes remained contaminated through the decade of use following that conflict. The aircrews, aeromedical evacuation crews and maintenance personnel were exposed to dioxin, the toxin in Agent Orange, by skin contact and inhalation of dioxin-laden dust.
As the Congressional letter noted, the veterans' exposure has been confirmed by numerous other federal agencies, including the CDC and National Institutes of Health, yet the VA declines to provide essential medical care and other benefits.
VA utilizes their unusual in-house definition of "exposed" (one unique among federal agencies and scientific societies and disputed by EPA, CDC and NIH) to skirt requirements under the Agent Orange Act of 1991. That law requires VA to care for Agent Orange veterans. In the agency's dealing with C-123 veterans, VA has added a requirement for proof of individual exposure to Agent Orange tied to resultant specific illnesses, termed "medical nexus."
VA's special definition effectively denies all C-123 veterans' claims of exposure because such proofs are not possible for individuals, and only possible for larger groups when evaluated by epidemiological specialists. Congress removed this virtually impossible individual burden of proof for Vietnam veterans by passing the Agent Orange Act. Title 38 and the Federal Register of 8 May 2001, page 23166, detail that VA will care for any veteran exposed to "military herbicide,' thus VA's special definition of "exposed" was created to bar C-123 veterans from care.
![]() |
| Rep. Richie Neal, D-MA |
Veterans suffering Agent Orange illnesses, such as prostate cancer, heart disease, peripheral neuropathy, ALS and otherrecognized ailments continue to hope that Congressman Neal, like so many of his colleagues in the House and Senate, eventually notice their situation and lend his support. Given the veterans' severe illnesses and age averaging in the late 60s, Mr. Neal's help would be useful sooner, rather than later.
Why is it left for the able Congresswoman from Oregon to lead this effort which should have had Congressman Neal's early and enthusiastic intervention with the Department of Veterans Affairs? Where is the voice of Westover's Congressman? How serious do our illnesses need to be to warrant his concern?
![]() |
| Then-Mayor Richard Neal with then-Captain Wes Carter, Springfield, 1991 |
Note: I first met Mr. Neal the night of the Springfield chlorine incident, when I was the first medical officer responding to the city's request for military assistance. Later, Mayor Neal honored all of the 439th Military Airlift Wing personnel who helped that stressful night, and later still, I met him at various city events. Lastly, we spoke in his Washington office where I sought his guidance and assistance for his district's veterans.
As with the other C-123 veterans who've sought his help, including his constituents, many subsequent letters and requests have been unanswered, although his staff had asked me to detail the situation for them. Apparently, requests for Congressman Neal's comments from Springfield's The Republican newspaper have also been ignored.
The Congressman is an able legislator so there must be a significant political reason for his avoidance of this issue. But for us as dioxin-exposed veterans, there is no avoidance possible.
23 October 2013
Congress Urges VA to Recognize C-123 Agent Orange Exposure!
In their letter submitted Monday, October 22, representatives from both parties joined Congresswoman Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) and Congressman Paul Cook in demanding the VA recognize C-123 veterans' exposure to Agent Orange. The deadly toxin contaminated the fleet of C-123 warplanes, used earlier in Vietnam for spraying Agent Orange.
October 22, 2013
Dear Secretary Shinseki:
Thank you for your work on behalf of our nation’s veterans. We were pleased to hear that the Department of Veterans Affairs recently reversed its denial of disability benefits for LTCOL Paul Bailey, who served on C-123 aircraft in the years after the Vietnam War. In light of this, we urge you to reevaluate previously-denied claims for other veterans who also served on C-123 aircraft. In addition, we ask that you expedite review on current pending cases for the veterans who served aboard these planes, many of whom are suffering from multiple illnesses.
From 1972 to 1982, between 1500 and 2500 aircrew, aerial port, and maintenance staff served on C-123 aircraft that had been used during the Vietnam War to spray military herbicides, including Agent Orange. These men and women served their country without knowledge of the danger posed to them by the dried herbicide residue on the aircraft. Many of the country’s top experts on Agent Orange, including the Director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the Director of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, have written detailed statements supporting the claims of the crewmembers that they were exposed to Agent Orange. Despite overwhelming evidence and support from the scientific community, the VA continues to deny that any level of exposure occurred.
As described in a recent Washington Post article, a 2009 recommendation by Hill Air Force Base in Utah stated that “smelting is necessary for these 18 [C-123] aircraft so the Air Force will no longer be liable for ‘presumptive compensation’ claims to any who works around this ‘Agent Orange’ metal.” This appears to indicate a desire to obscure evidence of Agent Orange exposure in order to deny benefits to those who served; if that is accurate, it is shameful and an affront to many who put their lives on the line for our country.
The C-123 veterans deserve better than this. Given the vast evidence from the toxicology community, as well as documentation from the military, the VA must seriously reconsider its position on this issue. Those whose claims were denied deserve to have their files reopened and reevaluated. And the claims that are still being processed must be given expedited, careful, and thoughtful review. This attention should be given to all C-123 veterans who, from 1972 to 1982, flew the same aircraft from the same bases and with the same mission.
We will continue to follow this issue closely. We look forward to a prompt response from you outlining the steps you plan to take to help the C-123 veterans.
Sincerely,
/Congressional Committee//
03 August 2013
Washington Post Reveals C-123 Veterans' Unfair Treatment at Hands of VA
![]() |
| Vogel has extensive combat reporting experience |
Vogel's writing focused on the three-decade evolution of the C-123 problem, resistance by VA and USAF authorities to meet veterans' hopes for medical care, and the pressure building in the Senate for definitive answers from the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. Assured by the Secretary of each claim being carefully evaluated, veterans point out that each is also carefully rejected, regardless of merit.
Federal agencies, including the NIH, CDC, EPA and US Public Health Service have challenged theVA's position against C-123 veterans' claims, labeling the agency's position "unscientific" and 'illogical" as well as "weird." Veterans concur. What we hope for now is simple - the VA needs to follow the law. The time once available for a special Institute of Medicine study is too long past, the VA having broken their 2012 promise to refer the question to that body. Now, veterans must demand the straight-forward approach of designating C-123s known to be former Agent Orange spray aircraft from Vietnam as "Agent Orange Exposure Sites" so that men and women with duties aboard the warplanes can proceed to submit their claims in hope of fair evaluations.

By Steve Vogel, Saturday, August 3, 4:46 PM
Nearly three dozen rugged C-123 transport planes formed the backbone of the U.S. military’s campaign to spray Agent Orange over jungles hiding enemy soldiers during the Vietnam War. And many of the troops who served in the conflict have been compensated for diseases associated with their exposure to the toxic defoliant.But after the war, some of the planes were used on cargo missions in the United States. Now a bitter
fight has sprung up over whether those in the military who worked, ate and slept in the planes after the war should also be compensated. Two U.S. senators are now questioning the Department of Veterans Affairs’ assertions that any postwar contamination on the planes was not high enough to be linked to disease.
Complicating the debate is that few of the planes remain to be tested. In 2010, the Air Force destroyed 18 of the Vietnam-era aircraft in part because of concerns about potential liability for Agent Orange, according to Air Force memos documenting the destruction.
Citing tests done on some of the aircraft in the 1990s, North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr, the ranking Republican on the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), have asked the VA’s Office of Inspector General to review whether the department is “inappropriately” denying disability compensation to veterans who claim they were sickened by postwar contamination.
“It appears that [the VA] does, in fact, plan to deny any C-123 claims regardless of the evidence submitted in a particular case,” the senators wrote. The letter notes that a group of outside experts have called the VA’s scientific conclusions “seriously flawed.”The Air Force says the planes’ destruction was handled properly.
“Because of the potential stigma associated with these aircraft, the Air Force ensured that the recycling of the aircraft was accomplished completely and that the metal was not stored improperly or abandoned prior to being smelted,” an Air Force statement said.
The C-123s were used to spray Agent Orange from 1962 to 1971 as part of Operation Ranch Hand. After the war, about 1,500 Air National Guard and Reserve crew members flew the planes on cargo missions in the United States until the last aircraft were retired in 1982.
The Air Force aborted plans to sell some of the planes in 1996, after evidence surfaced that 18 of them might still be contaminated with TCDD dioxin, a carcinogen associated with Agent Orange, according to Air Force documents and papers filed with the General Services Administration’s Board of Contract Appeals. The planes were quarantined instead in Arizona at a storage facility at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, nicknamed “the Boneyard.”
The Air Force did not notify the post-Vietnam crews or Boneyard employees of the potential risk, according to Air Force documents.
When tests on four of the quarantined planes in 2009 showed little or no remaining dioxin, the Air Force decided it was safe to destroy the aircraft.
Officials at Hill Air Force Base in Utah, which oversaw the planes, approved a consultant’s recommendation in 2009 to “dispose of/recycle the 18 UC-123K ‘Agent Orange’ aircraft as soon as possible to avoid further risk from media publicity, litigation, and liability for presumptive compensation,” according to a base memo in August 2009.
“The longer this issue remains unresolved, the greater the likelihood of outside press reporting on yet another ‘Agent Orange Controversy,’ ” consultant Alvin Young wrote in a report.
Base officials recommended that the aircraft be “shredded into cell phone-size pieces” and melted. “Smelting is necessary for these 18 aircraft so the Air Force will no longer be liable for ‘presumptive compensation’ claims to anyone who ever works around this ‘Agent Orange’ metal,” an Air Force memo said in September 2009.
In 2010, the aircraft were torn apart by heavy machinery, melted and poured into blocks.
“The toxic aircraft had to be eliminated,” said Wes Carter, a retired Air Force major who served aboard C-123s as a medical service officer in the United States for a decade. “The right thing to do would have included telling the veterans of the exposures so that health and well-being as well as rights to seek veterans benefits would all be protected.”
An Air Force review last year concluded that “given the absence of a clear finding of potential harm,” it was not necessary to notify the crews.
Carter, 66, had potentially lethal prostate cancer diagnosed in 2011. His doctor, Mark Garzotto, director of urologic oncology at the Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, wrote in February that the cancer is “likely related to your exposure [to] Agent Orange.”
But the VA has rejected compensation claims filed by Carter and other veterans who served on the aircraft after the war, saying their exposure to Agent Orange was too limited to connect to the diseases. The VA is committed to reviewing claims on “a case-by-case basis,” the department said in a statement. “VA does not have a ‘blanket policy’ for denying claims” filed by postwar C-123 veterans, VA Secretary Eric K. Shinseki wrote Burr, the senator, in June.
‘VA is very concerned’
Under federal law since 1991, the VA has granted the presumption of exposure to Agent Orange to any member of the military who served in Vietnam during the war. Some 260,000 cases have been filed since 2010, helping to fuel the backlog of disability claims facing the VA.
By 2009, the VA had agreed to compensate veterans who could show they were exposed to the defoliant during wartime testing in the United States.
The C-123 aircraft cases might open up claims for postwar service, as well, according to Young, the Agent Orange consultant who advised the Air Force.
“What this means is that a whole new class of veterans may claim that their exposure was due to the fact they were members of aircrews or mechanics associated with the contaminated aircraft that returned from Vietnam,” Young wrote in a June 2009 memo to Hill AFB.
A retired Air Force colonel and former professor of environmental toxicology at Oklahoma State, Young frequently serves as a consultant on Agent Orange for the Defense Department. The 2009 memos list him as a consultant on Agent Orange to the Office of Secretary of Defense; Young said he was advising Hill AFB in an “unofficial capacity.” Both Young and the Pentagon say the consultant was not under contract with the Defense Department at the time.
Young said in an interview that the decision to destroy the planes “had nothing to do with claims. There was never any destruction of evidence.”
Carter, an Oregon resident, and his comrades in the C-123 Veterans Association say postwar crews should be eligible for the same compensation for Agent Orange provided to those who served in Vietnam. He has filed complaints with the Air Force and VA, and collected many documents via Freedom of Information requests, which he provided to The Washington Post and posted online.
A 2011 Air Force epidemiological study of the crews that sprayed Agent Orange — “the most heavily exposed veterans of the Vietnam War,” according to the report — found no link between Agent Orange exposure and their diseases.
Last year, the VA hired Young to investigate the postwar C-123 claims giving him a no-bid sole-source $600,000 contract, and his report in November concluded that “ample evidence” disproves the veterans’ claims.
“The VA is very concerned, because it amounts to a lot of money to be paid for the rest of their lives when there isn’t the science to back it up,” Young said.
But a number of outside medical experts have concluded the veterans were likely exposed to dangerous levels of dioxins. In November, 14 prominent toxicologists sent the VA a letter saying the department’s scientific conclusions are based on “erroneous assumptions.”
“It’s not right,” said retired Air Force Lt. Col. Paul Bailey, a New Hampshire resident who served with Carter aboard C-123s and is gravely ill with cancer. “We were exposed, we can prove we were exposed, but they’re saying it doesn’t matter.”
Although the VA says there is no policy against postwar C-123 claims, Bailey was told that “VA regulations do not allow us to concede exposure to herbicides for Veterans who claim they were exposed to herbicides after the Vietnam war while flying in aircraft used to spray these chemicals,” the VA regional office in New Hampshire wrote in February, denying his claim.
The Board of Veterans’ Appeals, an administrative tribunal, has overturned VA denials several times, ruling in one case that the veteran who scrubbed planes saturated with Agent Orange after the war was exposed to the herbicide and entitled to compensation for his diabetes. But such appeals typically take years, time Bailey said he no longer has.
Disposing of aircraft
Bailey and Carter flew on one of the most famous of the C-123s for more than a decade, often eating and sleeping on the plane. Known as “Patches” for the holes left by enemy fire, it was sent to a museum in 1980.
Based on testing by Air Force toxicologists in 1994 that found Patches “heavily contaminated,” the plane’s postwar crews were exposed to dioxin “at a level greatly exceeding” the Defense Department screening levels, according to Thomas Sinks, deputy director of the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.
Many of the retired C-123s ended up in the Boneyard, and in 1996 the government arranged to sell them. But when employees at Davis-Monthan prepared the planes for buyers, they smelled chemical vapors and experienced burning sensations on their hands and arms, according to papers in a case later heard by the General Services Administration’s Board of Contract Appeals. Subsequent testing of 17 aircraft in August 1996 detected “strong potential of low level concentrations of dioxin,” according to Air Force documents. In December 1996, the Air Force requested the government terminate the sales, warning that “the potential for harm to individuals from dioxin contamination is great.” Employees at Davis-Monthan were not informed of the potential contamination until two years later, according to Air Force documents.
In 1998, the aircraft were fenced off in a restricted area and were largely untouched for another decade, before Air Force officials tried again to resolve the dilemma. They had concerns that the Environmental Protection Agency or Arizona Department of Environmental Quality could request access and levy fines, which a base official calculated could reach $3.2 billion.
“We are still at significant risk publicity wise and with AZ environmental law for these aircraft,” an Air Force officer at Hill wrote in May 2009.
The tests by an Air Force environmental office on four planes that month indicated they could be destroyed without risk to workers. Years in the Arizona sun had “likely volatilized any remaining Agent Orange,” reported Young.
“I join with Dr. Young in saying let’s get on with it,” Wayne Downs, hazardous-waste-program manager at Hill AFB, wrote Oct. 29, 2009. “Ben and Jerry’s ice cream has more dioxin than these aircraft.” Some Air Force officials were uneasy about the failure to test all the planes. “This lack of information is causing us, and has the potential to cause us, a lot more trouble than it would have been to just sample the aircraft,” Karl Nieman, an Air Force contractor at Hill, wrote in December 2009.
Normally, aircraft at Davis-Monthan slated for disposal are turned over to a defense agency, which would have the planes cut apart by a local metal recycler. But the agency balked, maintaining that the planes should be handled by a licensed hazardous-waste-disposal firm, a process that would require “worldwide” public notification, according to an Air Force memo.
Air Force officials instead contracted with a Navy aircraft disposal office in California, which used the same local metal recycler without the notification.
“If the Air Force wants quick and quiet disposal, the Navy option is preferable,” stated an Air Force memo in September 2009.
The destruction was approved by Hill AFB in 2010. No notification of the EPA or Arizona environmental officials was required, according to the Air Force, which noted in its statement that the collaboration with the Navy included obtaining the required demilitarization and destruction certification.
On June 8, 2010, as two Air Force officials watched, the last truckload carrying 35,000 pounds of shredded aluminum metal from the Boneyard arrived at a furnace in Belleville, Mich.
The furnace was heated to nearly 1,400 degrees, hot enough to destroy any traces of dioxins. Workers dumped in the metal. By 11 a.m. the last of the C-123 remains were being poured into 2,000-pound blocks.
The blocks, the Air Force officials were told, would be sold to the automotive industry.
13 June 2013
Chairman Senate Veterans Affairs Committee Promises Agent Orange Claims Support
Today I received from America's favorite "Socialist" Independent Senator from Vermont, crusty Bernie Sanders, a letter in response to our messages to him about C-123 veterans' claims.His response: "I promise to do everything in my power to endure that the brave men and women who have put their lives on the line to defend our country, receive the highest quality benefits." We certainly cannot ask for more from Senator Sanders or his dedicated staff headed by Mr. Steve Robertson.
The Chairman's guidance, along with that of Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina, Senator Merkley and Congresswoman Bonamici (both of Oregon) and their staffs, has been extremely helpful in getting attention from the VA about this issue, and in forcing VA to reveal their extra-legal policies and activities designed to prevent C-123 veterans' claims. Armed with the knowledge of VA mistakes, we can answer better and more completely their demands for well-documented "fully developed claims."
08 May 2013
C-123 Veterans Seek Senator Gillibrand's Assistance re: Agent Orange VA Claims
She has long championed the Blue Water Navy Agent Orange exposure issue, with her clear and unmistakable message that every veteran exposed to Agent Orange deserves equal access to VA medical care. Today we reached out to the Senator through her military and veterans affairs staff, taking Senator Gillibrand up on her leadership.
Our request. Not that she proceed with any legislation on our behalf, because none is needed - the law fully covers us except for the preference of VA leadership that we be excluded. Instead, we have asked that she compel VA to explain how their "experts" say we haven't been exposed (VA redefined standard definitions of "exposure" to prevent C-123 qualification) to Agent Orange, yet every other federal agency (NIH, CDC/ATSDR, EPA, US Public Health Service) and universities have made perfectly clear that we were exposed.
We share few common proofs of our Agent Orange exposure with the Blue Water Navy folks, but both of our organizations do indeed claim Agent Orange exposure and are seeking service connection for our members. We look forward to Senator Gillibrand lending her leadership and dioxin expertise to those who've long helped us, in particular, Senator Burr, Senator Merkley, Congresswoman Bonamici and their staffs.
With solid proofs such as we have provided her and the VA, this should be simple. We have already been told our mass of evidence easily persuades at the BVA level and any federal judge (using the VA's "as likely to as not") decision matrix, would conclude in our favor.
Anyway, we can always hope!
01 March 2013
Workin' the Hill - walking the hallowed halls of Congress
On Thursday, February 27 I had the opportunity to review the C-123 veterans' issues with the knowledgeable staff of Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and update them on the devices used by the VA to prevent our veterans' access to essential medical care.
Earlier, experts scientists from NIH had briefed the staff, and personnel from other legislators, regarding the scientific basic for our claims for exposure to Agent Orange. While perhaps only one C-123 veteran is a constituent of Senator Merkley, his enthusiasm for protecting that one veteran's entitlement to VA care is the same as if thousands more Oregon vets were in the same boat. What is right, simply is right, and Senator Merkley makes that clear.
What his staff also makes clear is that the legislative backing for C-123 veterans is now bi-partisan, and bi-cameral, reflecting the interests of both parties and both houses of Congress. They will continue to press for us in the face of VA interagency and improper interpretation (could we say, creation of their own) laws regarding Agent Orange-exposed veterans. Having joined forces with Senator Burr (R-NC) who is Ranking Member of the Senate Veterans Committee and Congresswoman Susanne Bonamici (D-OR) we have an effective legislative presence. Of course, it wouldn't hurt of C-123 veterans around the country worked hard to get their representatives in Congress to speak up on our behalf! (Hint!)
I also had the opportunity to update Merkley's folks on that morning's visit to the Army's Joint Services Records Research Center, which seems to have introduced some archival materials supportive of our exposure claims.
Later that afternoon, I went across the street to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, meeting with their legislative and veterans benefits staff to orient them to the concerns of our group. One of the two managers was already familiar, and we hope for another national resolution of support this summer, following their national convention. This VFW life member appreciates their leadership!
A full day. Followed by the appointment with VA's Director of the VA's Compensation Services, whose responsibility it is to deny C-123 veterans' claims. That department will review claims individually, and then deny them individually, using the same cookie-cutter phrases, in flat denial of outside scientific and medical expertise. The VA's "duty to assist" seems to have been completed (in their view) with the assignment to their staff, and to the staff of Veterans Health Administration, back in 2011, to prevent successful C-123 claims. Since the first teleconference which revealed their establishment of interpretations of scientific tests in a manner to prevent claims, nothing has changed, not a note has been made of any supporting opinions from a wide range of other federal agencies, universities and expert individual physicians and scientists.
Our hope: that the VA will offer suggestions on how our veterans can better prove our case. That the VA will guide us in the proper approach. That the VA will explain how our proofs could have been more persuasive. That the VA will have something they can tell us. That the VA will DO SOMETHING!
We'll see. We'll hope. After all, it is their duty, right?
Earlier, experts scientists from NIH had briefed the staff, and personnel from other legislators, regarding the scientific basic for our claims for exposure to Agent Orange. While perhaps only one C-123 veteran is a constituent of Senator Merkley, his enthusiasm for protecting that one veteran's entitlement to VA care is the same as if thousands more Oregon vets were in the same boat. What is right, simply is right, and Senator Merkley makes that clear.
What his staff also makes clear is that the legislative backing for C-123 veterans is now bi-partisan, and bi-cameral, reflecting the interests of both parties and both houses of Congress. They will continue to press for us in the face of VA interagency and improper interpretation (could we say, creation of their own) laws regarding Agent Orange-exposed veterans. Having joined forces with Senator Burr (R-NC) who is Ranking Member of the Senate Veterans Committee and Congresswoman Susanne Bonamici (D-OR) we have an effective legislative presence. Of course, it wouldn't hurt of C-123 veterans around the country worked hard to get their representatives in Congress to speak up on our behalf! (Hint!)
I also had the opportunity to update Merkley's folks on that morning's visit to the Army's Joint Services Records Research Center, which seems to have introduced some archival materials supportive of our exposure claims.
Later that afternoon, I went across the street to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, meeting with their legislative and veterans benefits staff to orient them to the concerns of our group. One of the two managers was already familiar, and we hope for another national resolution of support this summer, following their national convention. This VFW life member appreciates their leadership!
A full day. Followed by the appointment with VA's Director of the VA's Compensation Services, whose responsibility it is to deny C-123 veterans' claims. That department will review claims individually, and then deny them individually, using the same cookie-cutter phrases, in flat denial of outside scientific and medical expertise. The VA's "duty to assist" seems to have been completed (in their view) with the assignment to their staff, and to the staff of Veterans Health Administration, back in 2011, to prevent successful C-123 claims. Since the first teleconference which revealed their establishment of interpretations of scientific tests in a manner to prevent claims, nothing has changed, not a note has been made of any supporting opinions from a wide range of other federal agencies, universities and expert individual physicians and scientists.
Our hope: that the VA will offer suggestions on how our veterans can better prove our case. That the VA will guide us in the proper approach. That the VA will explain how our proofs could have been more persuasive. That the VA will have something they can tell us. That the VA will DO SOMETHING!
We'll see. We'll hope. After all, it is their duty, right?
12 February 2013
Oregon State Director of Veterans Affairs AGAIN Asked to Support C-123 Claims
Last year, we asked Oregon's Director of Veterans Affairs, Mr. Jim Willis, to support C-123 veterans' claims regarding Agent Orange exposure. His leadership is essential, both in the state and through his leadership positions in the National State Directors of Veterans Affairs. The previous national director, Dr. Linda Schwartz, Commissioner of Veterans Affairs for the State of Connecticut, had suggested we contact Mr. Willis. As an Oregon veteran who'd met Mr. Willis at various ceremonies, I sought his help.
And I was very surprised that he declined. After a year of many requests, phone calls, emails and mailings of our 300-page binder of Air Force documentation, Mr. Willis' office finally responded that he was not "persuaded" of any merit to our request. I'm amazed, and in particular, because the issue had already been carefully examined by Oregon Health Science University's Toxicology Program, which found that our aircrews were indeed exposed to Agent Orange. And we'd already had our situation vetted by both the American Legion and the Vietnam Veterans of America after their careful investigation, and each passed national resolutions demanding recognition of our claims by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Does Mr. Willis, as a state official, require even more official state agencies to vet our C-123 issues? Will he accept University of Oregon if he won't accept OSHU?
This situation with the Oregon DVA was very troubling. In particular, because the American Legion uses Oregon's state Department of Veterans Affairs to represent our Legionnaires' claims. If Director Willis, acting on behalf of the American Legion in representing a veteran's claim isn't "persuaded" with evidence from the State of Oregon (OHSU) why should the VA believe us? And why does Director Willis seem to have such a very high threshold of "persuasion" before he will assist an Oregon veteran? Was he able to rely of scientific materials other than those provided by Oregon Health Sciences University or did he find fault with their investigation of the C-123 contamination? I don't know.
So, I have requested that Director Willis review his decision to avoid helping us. Last week, the following letter was sent to the Oregon Department of Veterans Affairs, with a closing request that if Director Willis remains unpersuaded, that we be allowed to present our request for state help to his department's board of advisors.
--the text of our Association's letter to Director Willis:
And I was very surprised that he declined. After a year of many requests, phone calls, emails and mailings of our 300-page binder of Air Force documentation, Mr. Willis' office finally responded that he was not "persuaded" of any merit to our request. I'm amazed, and in particular, because the issue had already been carefully examined by Oregon Health Science University's Toxicology Program, which found that our aircrews were indeed exposed to Agent Orange. And we'd already had our situation vetted by both the American Legion and the Vietnam Veterans of America after their careful investigation, and each passed national resolutions demanding recognition of our claims by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Does Mr. Willis, as a state official, require even more official state agencies to vet our C-123 issues? Will he accept University of Oregon if he won't accept OSHU?
This situation with the Oregon DVA was very troubling. In particular, because the American Legion uses Oregon's state Department of Veterans Affairs to represent our Legionnaires' claims. If Director Willis, acting on behalf of the American Legion in representing a veteran's claim isn't "persuaded" with evidence from the State of Oregon (OHSU) why should the VA believe us? And why does Director Willis seem to have such a very high threshold of "persuasion" before he will assist an Oregon veteran? Was he able to rely of scientific materials other than those provided by Oregon Health Sciences University or did he find fault with their investigation of the C-123 contamination? I don't know.
So, I have requested that Director Willis review his decision to avoid helping us. Last week, the following letter was sent to the Oregon Department of Veterans Affairs, with a closing request that if Director Willis remains unpersuaded, that we be allowed to present our request for state help to his department's board of advisors.
--the text of our Association's letter to Director Willis:
Dear Director Willis,
Thank you for your note regarding Ed VanDyke’s new position as Deputy Director. I appreciate his earlier representation of me before the VA in both his ODVA and American Legion capacities. Earlier this year, your office wrote to convey your decision that you were not “persuaded” to assist disabled C-123 veterans such as me in our effort to gain service connection from the VA for Agent Orange exposure while serving aboard our contaminated C-123 transports.
We earlier gained endorsement of our issue from Dr. Linda Schwartz, Commissioner of Veterans Affairs in Connecticut, when she was president of the National Association of State Directors of Veterans Affairs. It was she who recommended I approach you. Dr. Schwartz is also a retired USAF flight nurse who flew with us on our C-123s…she knows our situation well.
We also have been fortunate to have Senator Merkely and Congresswoman Bonamici pressing the VA on this issue. As I wrote in my original request to Director Willis, Oregon Health Sciences University completed a detailed study of the C-123 contamination and concluded we were exposed. The CDC Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry concluded that “aircrews operating in this, and similar environments, were exposed.” (Dr. Tom Sinks, Deputy Director). NIH, when asked their input, deferred to Dr. Sink’s opinion as the appropriate source for such a finding. Thus we have the very agencies responsible for determining contamination and exposure issues confirming our exposure, yet the VA ignoring those agency’s input.
Before turning to you to seek assistance, the validity of our situation was confirmed by both the Vietnam Veterans of America and the American Legion, each of which passed national resolutions calling on the VA to grant service connection. More recently Dr. Linda Birnbaum of the NIH briefed senators’ staffers to explain the science involved about our exposure for the decade we flew them after the Vietnam War. In November, ten scientists and five physicians, from two federal agencies and many universities challenged VA improper and unscientific conclusions reached in opposing C-123 claims. Dr. Birnbaum in 2011 confirmed our veterans' exposure, and as Director of the NIH National Toxicology Program she certainly has the credentials to make that determination.
The Air Force Reserve Command has confirmed in their June 2011 FOIA response that the aircraft we flew were, in fact, the specific airplanes used in Vietnam for spraying Agent Orange, that proof joining the two Air Force Armstrong Labs tests which concluded in 1979 and 1994 that our aircraft were “heavily contaminated” and “a danger to public health. I have substantiated my own flying hours aboard several of our flying squadron (731st Tactical Airlift Squadron) assigned C-123s, identified as former spray aircraft. I have provided medical nexus letters from my cardiologist as well as Dr. Arnold Schecter, University of Texas Medical School, perhaps the most respected physician in this field.
The VA concedes our aircraft were contaminated but suggests it was minimal, however “minimal” is not a part of the 1991 law nor C.F.R.s in which exposed veterans outside Vietnam were to be treated the same as veterans with boots on the ground. They contest our effort to gain service connection by maintaining that we were not exposed in the airplane…a novel approach not taken before by any federal agency because contamination has always equaled exposure in decision-making cycles.
In toxicology, "exposure" is a separate issue from "contamination", and we have provided the VA scientific proof of exposure via dermal (primary) and inhalation (secondary) routes, and thus, with the established aircraft contamination and whatever Agent Orange-presumptive illnesses a veteran may have, satisfy the requirements set by the law and detailed in the C.F.R.s. When asked their view of our exposure on the C-123, EPA told us “exposure is the contact with a chemical or biological agent and the outer boundary of an organism.”
Therefore, we have evidenced both contamination and exposure. At least, according to science and medicine, but it seems not to the VA. Again, law does not describe how much dioxin nor the type of dioxin nor the type of exposure to dioxin. The VA’s arbitrary, and for them, customary insertion of additional qualifications to these areas solely to prevent our veterans’ service connection claims is unlawful.
Recently, my own 2011 application for Agent Orange benefits (our “poster child” claim because I’m already 100% VA and military disabled and thus argue our case without expectation of benefit), while recommended for approval by the Portland VARO, was denied in Washington because, according to the Compensation Division, “TCDD has not actually been shown to cause long-term health problems.” Every other VA document describes the dangers of TCDD, and TCDD is acknowledged to be the most toxic toxin on earth…but not in the perspective of C-123 exposure, according to the VA.
I had the opportunity to brief the Institute of Medicine Agent Orange Committee on our situation on 16 January 2013, and they were amazed that a VA decision-maker still expressed such views decades into the Agent Orange issue. As a veteran, faced with intransigence such as this, I become convinced that the VA seems determined to prevent our claims, however valid. At the March 2012 meeting with VA Public Health and VA Post-Deployment in Senator Burr’s office, VA leaders actually stated they won’t allow C-123 Agent Orange claims. Layers upon layers of proof supporting our claims have been submitted without effect, and there the matter seems to rest, until we gain the attention and support of leaders like the Oregon Director of Veterans Affairs.
I am not sure what further convincing evidence Oregon requires to gain the State’s assistance and support on this issue. As an Oregon 100% disabled war veteran, I believe I am entitled to turn you as our state’s director to represent me and others like me through leadership in the National Association of State Directors of Veterans Affairs and in veterans affairs in general.
I need that support now, please. I am again forwarding the various documents that I feel establish our case for both contamination and exposure, and trust they are convincing. If you do not find yourself persuaded, then as the chairman of the C-123 Veterans Association I ask that you bring this issue to the attention of the advisory board for their input and afford me an opportunity to meet with them.
Sincerely,
/s/ Wesley T. Carter, Chair
Major, USAF Retired, Medical Service Corps
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)














