New York State Now Offers 100% Disabled Vets Property Tax Exemption!

FYI to all 100% disabled vets: beginning in 2027, the State of New York joins 27 other states in excusing VA-100% disabled vets from all or most primary residence property taxes. This enables the small number of affected vets to keep the homes they have, or to get homes, without what many find to be a brick-wall tax barrier to home ownership. This is very kind of the state, especially considering my home state of Colorado only exempts a fraction of the home's value, typically saving totally disabled vets only a few hundred dollars.

This is a big reason Colorado ranks only 27th in value of benefits permitted disabled veterans. All legislators need to realize that states with stronger benefits keep (or attract) veterans and the economic impact of the vets and their retirements/pensions more than outweighs the cost of the benefits.

Disabled Veterans: A New 2026 Savings Program with tax-free investment growth: The Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) account

GREAT NEW IRS TAX BENEFIT FOR DISABLED VETERANS. An Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) account is a tax-advantaged savings tool for individuals (including disabled veterans who qualify) with disabilities, allowing them to save $20,000 each year without losing federal benefits like SSI, Medicaid, or VA disability! Authorized by the 2014 ABLE Act, these accounts vary somewhat by state, but they generally enable tax-free growth and withdrawals for "qualified disability expenses" such as housing, education, and transportation. Effective January 1, 2026, eligibility expands to those whose disability began before age 46, allowing tax-free growth and withdrawals for housing, healthcare, and education.

Previously, the disability had to begin by age 26, and that left most veterans unable to apply because so many of us became disabled later in life. Fortunately for us, the government moved that qualifying age up to 46 or earlier. For example, I was medically retired at age 45 following the Gulf War, but now am eligible for an ABLE account. There is a veteran-specific web page to learn more. An ABLE account seems ideal for those of us who don't itemize deductions...consult a tax professional wiser than me! An ABLE account is funded with after-tax income, but can also accept gifts and unearned income investment, unlike IRAs which are for earned income only.

Key Details for ABLE Accounts:

Eligibility: Must be a U.S. citizen/US state resident with a qualifying disability (SSA criteria) that began before age 46. 100% VA service-connected disability does not automatically apply, as VA and SSA disability standards are different. The issue is based on inability to work, although some employment is allowed. Checking qualifications online at the Able National Resource Center is an important next step. Each state also has its own info page, and vets can get specific info. 

Benefits: Funds in the account are generally not counted against means-tested benefits (like VA, Medicaid/SSI) up to certain limits.

Tax Advantages: Contributions may be deductible from state income tax (they are in Colorado and most states), and earnings grow tax-free. ABLE accounts allow qualified disabled veterans to save up to $20,000 annually (2025/2026) without jeopardizing means-tested benefits like Medicaid or VA disability or pension, provided their disability occurred before age 46 (as of Jan 2026). Funds grow tax-free and can be used for qualified disability expenses, including housing, transportation, and healthcare. Property taxes and mortgage payment are typically included in the "housing" category.

Key Details for Disabled Veterans' ABLE Accounts

Eligibility Expansion: As of January 1, 2026, the age of onset for the disability increased from 26 to 46, making millions more, including many veterans, eligible.

Protection of Benefits: ABLE accounts allow for savings that do not count against the individual resource limit for SSI or other means-tested programs, such as the VA non-service-connected pension.

Definition of Disability: You must meet the Social Security Administration's (SSA) definition of "marked and severe" functional limitations, or have a signed physician's certification. You do not need to be receiving Social Security disability benefits to qualify, Additionally, if you were on SSDI but "aged-out" at 65, that's considered qualifying.

Qualified Expenses (QDEs): Funds can be used tax-free for a wide range of expenses, including education, housing, transportation, healthcare, prevention of homelessness, and employment training.

Contribution Limits: In 2026, the annual contribution limit is $20,000 which may increase annually. The current maximum in an account is limited to $100,000.

Account Setup: Veterans can open an account in any state that accepts out-of-state residents, with many offering online enrollment. 

Eligibility:

Eligible for your state's ABLE account

US citizen and state resident

New accounts must be opened by June 30, 2026.

The account must be in good order to receive funds.

Funds can be dispersed the following month from when the account was opened.

VA Claims for Peripheral Neuropathy – CLAIMS ARE NOT RESTRICTED TO ONE YEAR AFTER AGENT ORANGE EXPOSURE!

I've had so many conversations with veterans complaining that VA refuses their disability claims for delayed onset peripheral neuropathy. Theylling me that VA insists peripheral neuropathy (PN) is only covered if diagnosed within a year of Agent Orange exposure.

WRONG. But also just partly right: VA does have a presumptive disability for early onset-peripheral neuropathy diagnosed within a year of exposure. PN can also be claimed as a secondary disability from diabetes, and diabetes is a presumptive illness and that claim easily established. Very few veterans had early PN diagnosis because it most often develops over years.

But in no way does having PN diagnosed later in life prohibit PN disability claims based on what VA terms "direct service connection." 

Put simply, direct service connection means a little more work convincing VA that, more likely than not, your peripheral neuropathy developed as a result of Agent Orange exposure regardless of the disease onset. You do this with a physician's nexus letter, which hopefully cites some of the many medical articles showing PN onset years and even decades after leaving military service.

Here's one such article, and it mentions PN developing 25-30 years after exposure:

de la Monte SM, Goel A. Agent Orange Reviewed: Potential Role in Peripheral Neuropathy and Neurodegeneration. Journal of Military Veterans Health. 2022 Apr;30(2):17-26. PMID: 36785586; PMCID: PMC9920643.

If needed, here's a helpful guide for submitting direct service connection and secondary condition service connection claims.

What is Combat Related Special Compensation & the Importance to Retired Reservists

Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) provides tax-free payments to retired Veterans (and Retired Reservists) with combat-related disabilities. You must apply for CRSC through your uniformed service. A VA disability decision based on Agent Orange exposure qualifies for CRSC because AO is considered "an instrumentality of war."

Eligibility for Combat-Related Special Compensation:

All of these must be true:

• You’re retired (and entitled to or receiving military retirement pay), and
• You have a VA disability rating of at least 10%, and
• You currently have your DoD retirement payments reduced by the amount of your VA disability payments

To qualify, one of these must be true:

• You had 20 or more years of service in the military, National Guard, or Reserve, or
• You retired for medical reasons with a disability rating of at least 30% (under Chapter 61), or
• You’re covered under the Temporary Early Retirement Act (TERA), or
• You’re on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL), or
• You’re on the Permanent Disability Retired List (PDRL)

Evidence and other documents you’ll need to provide:

Evidence like this that proves your disability or injuries are the result of a combat-related event:

• Service medical records. These must be from when your injury happened. They must show the severity of your medical condition and that it’s combat-related.
  Note: Provide only relevant medical records. Please don’t send us all your medical records.
• Official service records. These include After Action Reports, Investigative Reports, personnel action requests (like DA 4187), and performance evaluations (like NCOERs and OERs), flight orders, AF Form 603
• Decorations and award recommendations. These include Purple Heart citations, Combat Action Badges, medals, and decorations for valor.

Other documents:

• Retirement records. These include retirement orders and the Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer.
• Your VA decision notice
• Your DD214

What the evidence must show about your combat-related disability

The evidence must show that your injury happened while you were:

• Engaged in armed conflict (in combat or during an occupation or raid), or 
• Engaged in hazardous duty (like demolition, flying, or parachuting), or
• Participating in war simulation activities (like live fire weapons practice or hand-to-hand combat training), or
• Exposed to instruments of war (like a military vehicle, weapon, or chemical agent such as Agent Orange), or
• Engaged in an activity you received a Purple Heart for

How to request the documents you need

Decision notice: Send us a request in the form of a letter or note. Unless you have kept a copy, be sure to ask for “my VA rating decision letter,” and sign your name. Send your request to your nearest VA regional office.

Find your nearest VA regional office

Tinnitus: A Frequent Disability of C-123 Veterans. Should You File a Claim?

Yes. Absolutely submit a VA disability claim!

"It's a fact aircrews know well. Service members who work in and around aircraft are more likely to suffer hearing deficits!" (VA publication)

Aircrew duty in a C-123, C-130 and other military aircraft frequently causes (or worsens) hearing loss and/or ringing in the ears (tinnitus.) Hearing loss is the most common disability claimed by veterans and it is serious. Hearing loss and tinnitus is usually permanent, cumulative, and worsens with aging well past the years of your military service.

When a veteran submits a claim, the VA arranges a hearing test (a "Compensation and Pension Exam.") Then, if the problem meets VA standards, the vet is granted a disability rating, typically ten percent. In 2024 that's about $171 per month, tax-free, for the rest of your life. They also provide medical care with free audiology exams and high-end hearing aids if required. The compensation dates from the day VA receives a claim, so it makes sense to apply immediately if you believe you have the problem. Claims can be submitted on-line or by mail. Major veterans organizations such as DAV, VFW and the American Legion offer free claims assistance, as do all state veterans service departments and most counties.

It is important to know hearing problems can also lead to other, even more serious disabilities. The VA considers these "secondary conditions." Linking these secondary conditions to the initial hearing loss disability can lead to an increased overall disability rating, vital VA medical care for those problems and  greater monthly compensation.

Example: My college roommate had an incident during Army Reserve basic training in 1969 which affected his hearing and was documented. However, that documentation was misfiled into his dental records. Over the years following military service the hearing loss increased greatly and he was convinced (he resisted years of my urging!)  to submit a VA disability claim. He was initially granted a 30% disability rating due to the severity of the hearing problem but his secondary condition of depression related to hearing loss lead to a 100% total disability rating. He initially received a check for around $32,000 and qualified for full federal and state veterans benefits, something Reservists and National Guard personnel don't usually qualify for without active duty service.

This was a significant financial benefit, much needed in his situation. I referred him to Katrina Eagle, an experienced veterans attorney who discovered the "lost" Army documentation for the original 1969 hearing injury, and she convinced the VA to make this veteran's 100% disability rating retroactive - to 1969! The final check for that backdated VA compensation was well over $100,000.

That was certainly an unusual situation, but secondary conditions are important for the VA to address, both in medical care and compensation. Let's look at hearing injury secondary conditions:

Secondary Conditions Related to Aviation Tinnitus or Hearing Loss:

Migraine Headache Conditions Secondary to Tinnitus or Hearing Loss: (continued below)

VA Disability Claim Form VA 526EZ now includes Agent Orange C-123 details

 Reference VA Form 526EZ disability claim form.

I hadn't noticed but Veterans Benefit Administration now includes C-123 veterans in their Agent Orange exposure section. BTW: if you haven't checked with VA for their full range of toxic exposure disabilities, do so NOW!

VA 526EZ, Section IV EXPOSURE INFORMAON

New Diagnosis - Parkinson's Disease

New Diagnosis - Parkinson's Disease

They might have figured out some of the problems I've been having...I got diagnosed with Parkinson's last week. The symptoms are there but don't seem to be advancing too fast, so at age 75 I can hope to "age out" of the worst of it.

Another blessing brought to us by Agent Orange! Parkinson's, Parkinsonism and Parkinsons-like symptoms are now considered Agent Orange presumptive illnesses, along with bladder cancer and all the old favorites!

Helped my college roommate win huge, 52-year old VA disability claim!

$155,000. It will be in his bank on Monday," said his attorney K. E, when she called to give me the great news. My old college roommate has won a 52-year old VA claim he'd long-forgotten having submitting in 1969 when he left active duty. 

I got his initial VA claim approved earlier this year at 40% disability with an initial check for $7,000, paying what was due from November 2020 when I mailed it. However, I knew he needed professional help trying to get other serious disabilities related to what the VA decided is already service-connected.

I recommended the attorney I knew best, who also has her solo veteran-focused practice near my friend. Her expertise uncovered the fact that his initial claim had been submitted back in 1969, filed and lost somehow into his VA dental records and never adjudicated. She slapped the paperwork into the mail to catch up with this VA error, and today's great news comes as a blessing for my old friend.

What a happy day!

VETERANS BENEFITS FOR USAF RESERVISTS & ANG WITH TINNITUS AND HEARING LOSS

Are you ineligible for VA benefits because you're a "traditional reservist?"

If hearing injuries resulting from flight or aircraft maintenance duties might qualify you for VA compensation and other benefits. Here's how.

Traditional reservists aren't eligible for most VA benefits because our "active duty for training" doesn't count towards true veteran status. Regardless of how long one's initial active duty for basic and technical school might be, the law doesn't recognize that as "active service." VA recognizes completion of an active duty enlistment, or active duty during wartime to qualify a servicemember for benefits, but UTAs, annual tour, active duty for basic and other training are grouped into ineligible "active duty for training." No bennies.

BUT – there'a a big exception to that for any disabling injury or disease you might experience.

Tinnitus is just one such injury. That ringing in the ears, or wind noise or low hum is caused by loud noises. Noises like a C-123 or C-130 makes. Noises like an M-16 makes at 154dB.

Flyers, tank crews, infantry, artillery and others around loud noises in a military setting often suffer tinnitus, and VA recognizes that as a frequent disability - in fact, it is the most common disability veterans have.

And if you have tinnitus you might be entitled to VA care and compensation for that disability, and if you are, that makes you a veteran with all the benefits that wartime veterans receive.

I got into this recently to help an army reservist who had tinnitus from his time in basic training when he fired the M-14 rifle and did not have any ear protection. Noises of 85 dB and above can cause permanent hearing loss and tinnitus, and our aircraft are far noisier than that: The cockpit is steady at over 112 dB. The noise is worse in the rear!

After my altitude chamber ride at Edwards AFB I started flying in 1974. I recall that by 1975 or so we received the yellow foam earplugs and they provided some protection from noise hazards. But there was still significant noise reaching the inner ear to cause damage. This kind of damage is permanent and cumulative and can evidence itself in tinnitus and/or hearing loss even years later.

Here is my point in the VA's own words: “When a claim for service connection is based on a period of active duty for training, there must be evidence that the individual concerned became disabled as a result of a disease or injury incurred or aggravated in the line of duty during the period of active duty for training.“

That is per 38 U.S.C. § 1131 (see also 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). See CAVC Hensley v. Brown – “claimant may establish direct service connection for a hearing disability initially manifest several years after separation from service on the basis of evidence showing that the current hearing loss is causally related to injury or disease suffered in service.”( 5 Vet. App. 155, 164 (1993).” Also see VA Training Letter 10-02 at 15 (rescinded re: incorporation into VBA Adjudication Procedures Manual (M21-1), pt. III, subpt. iv, ch. 4, § D.1-3)

VA compensation for a tinnitus disability is a modest $144 per month, but the real importance here is that a hearing injury establishes legal veteran status with all the benefits that attach to being a wartime veteran (we've been in a period of war ever since Desert Storm.) Sometimes there are secondary issues to hearing loss like depression or hypertension. Rarely, there have been vets getting up to 50% disability ($995/month) based on hearing loss and complications.

You might not need them now, but benefits include pension rights, medical and pharmacy (perhaps with modest co-payments,) rehab, hearing aids, VA home loan, e

Flight Nurse Wins Unique C-123 Agent Orange Claim

The VA Board of Veterans Appeals recently published their decision on a Westover C-123 veteran's Agent Orange claim, and it granted full benefits. There was no question about this veteran's eligibility for Agent Orange benefits but the disability claimed was not one VA presumes associated with exposure. The claim was submitted in August 2015, denied in October 2015, and finally won on appeal effective retroactive to the date first submitted.

Winning a claim for a disability VA doesn't associate with Agent Orange exposure is difficult. I won my claim for, among other things, avascular necrosis, and here VA accepted a type of cancer not on their list. It can be done but requires persistence and lots of skillful argument.

Congratulations are due here for the years this veteran invested in pursuit of the justice due C-123 veterans for our Agent Orange exposure!

Review: Our two goals for C-123 Veterans' Agent Orange Benefits

Simple. A mostly successful seven-year effort. Many folks chipped in funds to help and I never wrote thank-you cards. That is because all I did was work and the contributors know it and know their help was vital.

GOAL ONE. VA designation of C-123 veterans as "presumptively exposed" to Agent Orange, thus entitling us to VA medical care and other benefits.
STATUS: MET ON JUNE 19 2015

GOAL TWO: Get our VA disability claims honored from the earliest date submitted, if earlier than what VA limits for retroactivity (June 19 2015 at the earliest.) This is because many C-123 vets had claims in prior to that date, but were met with the then-automatic VA denial. And VA did deny...100% of all our claims were refused.

STATUS: ONLY VERY PARTLY MET

At least the VA barrier to our retroactive claims has been broken down a little. A handful of C-123 vets had claims approved via BVA appeals (Paul Bailey, Dick Matte) but VA has been firm in limiting retroactive claims to June 19 2015 and no earlier. It has to do with Reservists not being entitled to disability benefits unless disabled during the Reserve duty.

For some, this has cost tens of thousands in anticipated, but denied, "catch-up" checks. An example: a claim submitted in 2007 but denied at the time, then honored by VA once its C-123 rule was published on June 19 2015. If the vet was due a 100% disability rating, that's eight years of compensation VA won't pay...about $200,000 lost by the vet because of VA's limit of retroactivity set at June 2015.

The good news: at least one claim has been awarded retroactive Agent Orange benefits from the date submitted (in this case, March 2011. On the vet's appeal the BVA determined that C-123 exposure itself was a disabling injury that would date from "back in the day" while flying the Provider. That decision meant the affected Reservist satisfied the law's requirements regarding a disabling injury to trigger statutory veteran status, and the claim was honored back to the date the vet first filed for Agent Orange disabilities. That was a lot of money, with thanks due to the National Veterans Legal Services Project and their cooperating pro bono attorneys!

DISABILITY COMPENSATION: Three paths to C-123 vets' retroactive compensation

Many of us C-123 veterans were diagnosed with Agent Orange illnesses before the VA recognized our rights to disability compensation. At that time (June 2015) it seemed impossible to get VA to recognize those claims from the date filed, as VA usually does. 

Last month that changed! In our favor!

An October decision at the Board of Veterans Appeals, supported by similar decisions in years past, suggest three approaches to retroactive compensation for C-123 veterans. There is no certainty, because decisions at the BVA do not set precedent. Decisions do, however, offer guidance. VBA seeks consistency, and thus far BVA decisions are 100% behind retroactive disability benefits.

Here are three situations where I see VA awarding retroactive disability compensation to C-123 veterans. Obviously, for those vets with illnesses diagnosed after June 2015 and who file claims after June 2015, the date of filing should be the effective date for compensation if approved.

 1. Veterans who filed disability claims on or after June 2015 who were diagnosed before June 2015 and whose illnesses continued until the date of filing their claim; in those cases, it seems that up to 12 months of compensation may be recovered:

 “Retroactive effective dates are allowed, to a certain extent, in cases where an award or increase of compensation is granted pursuant to a liberalizing law.  38 U.S.C.A. § 5110 (g); 38 C.F.R. § 3.114 (a). Under these provisions, the claimant must have met all eligibility criteria for the liberalized benefit on the effective date of the liberalizing law or VA issue, and have been continuously eligible from that date to the date of claim or administrative determination of entitlement. These provisions apply to original and reopened claims, as well as claims for increase. Id.; see also McCay v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 183, 188 (1996), aff'd, 106 F.3d 1577, 1581 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
In such cases, the effective date of the award or increase shall be fixed in accordance with the facts found, but shall not be earlier than the effective date of the liberalizing law or VA issue. 38 C.F.R. § 3.114 (a). For claims received more than one year after the effective date of the liberalizing law or VA issue, benefits may be authorized for a period of one year prior to the date of receipt of the request for review. Id.”

2. Veterans who had a disabling line of duty injury during the period (1972-1982) that they were also being exposed to Agent Orange, thus establishing veteran status:

“Exposure constitutes an injury under 38 U.S.C. 101 (24) (B) and (C). If an individual described in this paragraph develops a disease listed in 38 CFR 3.309(e) as specified in paragraph (a)(6)(ii) of this section, it will be presumed that the individual concerned became disabled during that service for purposes of establishing that the individual served in the active military, naval, or air service.”

3.     Veterans with VA disability claims for Agent Orange-related illnesses predating June 2015 and who were denied retroactive compensation, receiving compensation only from June 2015 forward:

“GC Precedent Opinion VAOPGEPREC 4-2002 recognizes that a reservist's adverse reaction to exposure to a toxin during ADT qualifies as an injury under 38 USC 101(24) and therefore entitles him to compensation under 38 U.S.C. 110 or 1131. Thus, the regulation that grants presumptive C-123 rule was not a liberalizing law and his benefits should pre-date the effective date of 38 C.F.R. § 3.307 (a)(6) (v).”

A Quarter Century of VA Disability Claims: 25 years of hard lessons

A brief narrative of interest to others dealing with environmental hazards and the VA

Looking back, if I’d known how long and how hard a VA disability claim was going to be, I can’t say whether I’d have the resolve to see it through. I served in the Army and Air Force for 26 years. Only this month...October 2017...have I received VA’s final adjudication of disability claims I began submitting in 1992. Finally, 26 years after hanging up my flight suit the last time, VA seems to have finished addressing my cancers, spinal cord injuries, 21 operations, heart attacks, Agent Orange exposures plus life’s` miscellaneous little ailments, boo-boos and maladies.

First lesson: thank goodness my family and I, unlike so very many veterans, didn’t find ourselves dependent on the VA for medical care and income because that help wouldn’t materialize for many years. My Air Force disability board and retirement as a major was completed in what now seems light speed only a year after leaving Bethesda Naval Hospital in 1992 following the Gulf War. We were also blessed with ample pre-war civilian retirement and investments...we were so lucky compared to young troops disabled before having a chance to establish themselves financially. My lesson has been awareness of how financially precarious sudden military injuries leave a family. It is a bleak picture.

The rest of the lessons:

A PARTIAL VICTORY: Retroactive C-123 benefits for claims AFTER June 19, 2015!

ARE YOU A C-123 VETERAN WHO FILED AN AGENT ORANGE CLAIM AFTER JUNE 2015 BUT YOUR ILLNESS WAS DIAGNOSED BEFORE THEN?

Most likely, the VA started your disability compensation effective on the date you filed, not when you became ill. That may have cost you months or years of lost compensation.

I think I found a solution to recover those lost months and years of compensation, based on language a BVA veterans law judge used in a recent C-123 decision. There is a way to backdate to June 2015 some or all of the compensation due you.

Once it finishes processing an application, the VA provides disability compensation for claims based on the date filed. Many of our C-123 veterans were diagnosed with Agent Orange related illnesses before the VA rules took effect for us on June 18 2015.

Many of our vets submitted claims after that date but have Agent Orange illnesses diagnosed before then. In that situation, there is a way you can argue for compensation not based on whenever you filed after June 2015 but instead, all the way back to the June 2015, for a maximum of twelve months compensation. As an example, twelve months of prostate cancer at 100% is over $30,000, so you'll want to consider this carefully with any claim submitted after June 2015.

Read the following paragraph (taken from a C-123 retroactive compensation decision) very carefully.  1. Note that it specifies Agent Orange illnesses diagnosed prior to the date of the liberalizing law VA used to grant benefits, which for C-123 claims is June 19 2015.
2. Also, that illness must have been evident from the diagnosis to the date whenever you filed. If your prostate cancer was diagnosed in 2011 and cured in 2014, this won't apply to you. If, however, you remained on "watchful waiting" up to June 19 2016 and beyond, this rule could apply. Same thing for any of the other Agent Orange illnesses like diabetes, IHD, peripheral neuropathy, etc.
3. If your claim was submitted after June 19 2016, and your diagnosed illness continued from before June 18 2015 to the date your claim was filed, say June of 2017, could argue retroactivity only to June 19, 2015. That is because VA limits this situation to one year of back pay.

However, retroactive effective dates are allowed, to a certain extent, in cases where an award or increase of compensation is granted pursuant to a liberalizing law. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5110 (g); 38 C.F.R. § 3.114 (a). Under these provisions, the claimant must have met all eligibility criteria for the liberalized benefit on the effective date of the liberalizing law or VA issue, and have been continuously eligible from that date to the date of claim or administrative determination of entitlement. These provisions apply to original and reopened claims, as well as claims for increase. Id.; see also McCay v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 183, 188 (1996), aff'd, 106 F.3d 1577, 1581 (Fed. Cir. 1997). In such cases, the effective date of the award or increase shall be fixed in accordance with the facts found, but shall not be earlier than the effective date of the liberalizing law or VA issue. 38 C.F.R. § 3.114 (a). For claims received more than one year after the effective date of the liberalizing law or VA issue, benefits may be authorized for a period of one year prior to the date of receipt of the request for review. Id.

I'll summarize:.

1. This is for claims for illnesses diagnosed before June 18 2015 and continuing to the date a claim was submitted to VA.

2.  VA limits this retroactive compensation to one year. If you filed after June 2016 or any later date, you may be eligible for one year of retroactive compensation.

If you think this may apply to you, please discuss with your veterans service organization...you will probably have to bring them a clipping of the paragraph I quoted from the C-123 award.

Dr. Al Young – paid 55 foot tall stack of $100 bills to block C-123 Agent Orange claims!

Dr. Al Young. Famed Agent Orange apologist. Opposed to C-123 Agent Orange disability claims.

He was paid $600,000 on his most recent VA contract for opposing Agent Orange claims...and he's made millions altogether from VA and DoD...and from Dow and Monsanto. He's doing a contract now for the US Army Public Health Command, even though the Institute of Medicine concluded his input was "conjecture, nor evidence-based." But maybe the Army hasn't heard?

But the question plagued me..."What does $600,000 look like?" I've never seen so much cash. 

So, I checked the internet. A $600,000 stack of $100 bills makes a 55.47 foot tall stack. Used bills are thicker with wrinkles, and would be about 59 feet.

Important VA and military abbreviations

This list copied from a YUKO post by SC Vet .

Acronyms Used When Veterans Benefits Are Involved. 

Acronymns, Abbreviations, and Short-cuts used by the Government, both State and Federal, as well as by involved individuals when discussing Veterans Benefits, Retirement and Disability:

38 CFR - Title 38 Code of Federal Regulations
38 USC - Title 38 of the United States Code
A&A - Aid and Attendance
AAFES - Army & Air Force Exchange Service
ABD - Annuity Beginning Date
ACE Automated Certificate of Eligibility
AD - Active Duty
ADA - Americans with Disabilities Act
AFEES - Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Station
AIS - Automated Information Systems
AL - American Legion
ALS - Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
AMC - Appeals Management Center
AMVETS - AMVETS (American Veterans)
AO - Agent Orange
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge

Wonderful news from Rickenbacker C-123 Widow – CLAIM APPROVED!

Received this email today, with wonderful news from a Rickenbacker widow:

Dear C-123 Association,

I am writing to thank you, once again for all you have done for me and all concerned with the C-123 problem.

I heard from the VA that My late husband was deemed to have died from AO related disease and they have already deposited money into my account. 

There is no explanation of the amount or how that is determined. It is 1/2 of what the Vietnam Veterans Assoc told me three years ago that would be awarded if it was determined that he had "boots on ground."  (That is something that I know to be true, but cannot prove.)

I am assuming that either the Vietnam Vet Assoc was in error or that the widow's pension is decreased by 1/2.

In any case, I'm happy that they acknowledged his death was due to AO exposure.

I am sorry to hear about the mix-up with Chief Master Sergeant Henley's case. I hope it is resolved quickly.

Again, you will never know how deeply grateful I am to you.

God bless you,

Barbara C.

C-123 Agent Orange Veterans Propose Line of Duty Investigation of Our Exposures (no answer from VA to either proposal)

In hopes that VA continues seeking a process to permit C-123 veterans' retroactive disability compensation, we reached out to VA leaders to restate our arguments. A particularly interesting tactic might be Line of Duty determinations through the Air Force for our exposure injuries to meet statutory requirements for "veteran" status. VA's Interim Final Rule liberalizing rule to grant veteran status wouldn't be necessary, and VA could reconsider its retroactive disability compensation barrier. 
Secretary McDonald' said when announcing his C-123 decision, “Opening up eligibility for this deserving group of Air Force veterans and reservists is the right thing to do,” said Secretary McDonald. “We thank the IOM for its thorough review that provided the supporting evidence needed to ensure we can now fully compensate (emphasis added) any former crew member who develops an Agent Orange-related disability."  

We say, Keep trying, VA!

Our email to VA, January 7, 2016:

If tomorrow VBA must continue denying C-123 veterans' retroactive disability compensation, we respect that endeavor but are disappointed with it.

Our C-123 folks have a different perspective. Mr. Gxxxxx Bxxxxxx is an example of one of your C-123 veterans who has waited over six years for VA to resolve the issues of his prostate cancer and, more recently, leukemia also. 

VBA approved his 2009 claim only in June 2015, and his leukemia claim in August 2015, with all retroactive compensation denied, of course. I don't know how the percentages of disability would have been calculated with his prostate cancer, but he is presently at 40%. 

Had that percentage held for the six years since VA got his claim, this vet's compensation due would be around $45,000. Compensation he has waited patiently for VA to take care of in its normal course of granting claims back to date received. Like all of us, Bradley was not expecting the negative impact of the Interim Final Rule's liberalizing effect and dismissal of the VA OGC precedential opinions.  

What he'd waited for was only partial compensation for his pain and suffering, and only partial compensation for considerable loss of working time from his cancers. There is no compensation for this veteran's reduced life expectancy.

Air Force LOD manual AFI 36-2910 has as its overall philosophy protection of the servicemember's military benefits and eventually, veterans' benefits as well. We're asking Air Force for that philosophy to have full play here. The AFI requires Air Reserve Component members to report exposure and other illnesses and injuries within the regulation's mandatory 180 days, after which only VA would have authority. 

Fortunately, this requirement is satisfied because we reported the issue in early 1979 after which the Air Force Armstrong Labs submitted its incomplete Conway Report on one of our squadron's airplanes, C-123K  #362 ("Patches") and identified military herbicide residue. Using that data and test date from 1994, CDC ATSDR confirmed to VBA in 2011, we have a 200-fold greater risk of cancer than screening values. Not 2X. 200X. CDC said we should have been flying in full HAZMAT, but that was too late to help anyone.

The VA has a caring philosophy similar to the Air Force, but with specifically, a duty of insuring all the benefits due a veteran are provided, while at the same time taking a pro-veteran, non-adversarial and paternalistic perspective with every benefit of the doubt resting with the veteran. In clearer words, do all that's right by us within the law.

Last week VBA explained why DOD JSRRC confirmation (in 2013 and again in 2014) to the Agent Orange Desk of our exposures was not required to be shared with our veterans and why it did not apply to Reservists per VA 21-1MR and the VCAA. I don't understand their logic about why our being Reservists made it necessary for VBA to hide such official government confirmation of our exposures from us until after the Institute of Medicine C-123 hearings. 

I trust that VA can and will (if leadership approves) find a path forward which respects the rules you must operate under as well as the rights and benefits needed by and due C-123 veterans who volunteered for many years to fly these toxic airplanes, and who have already waited decades for your help.

An aside, please: VA has done a wonderful job with St Paul's processing C-123 issues. VA is also doing a great job using many different channels to get the word out to our veterans. Thank you!

Our email to VA, January 4, 2016:

I have raised the concern about C-123 retroactive disability compensation, presently blocked by the liberalizing rule per the Interim final Rule. The hope is to find a compromise for at least a year of retroactive compensation, presently blocked by the statutory "veteran" issue already much discussed. 

Our view is that by late 2011 VA had ample government evidence to form "an overwhelming preponderance of evidence" supporting our claims but instead insisted it had "an overwhelming preponderance of evidence" against them. VCAA and VA21-1 should have helped the input from ATSDR, NIH, USPHS and JSRRC be considered with our claims evaluation on the "case by case" basis Secretary Shinseki and Under Secretary Hickey assured us was the case. Instead, resolution was postponed until June 2015. 

The few C-123 grants made prior to June 2015 all received full retroactive disability compensation (all were granted either by DRO or BVA decisions, none by VARO actions.)

Months ago when we met at the Senate Russell building to discuss the C-123 IOM report prior to publication of the Interim Final Rule, I raised the hypothetical concern of Ebola exposures and asked whether VA would treat Air National Guard and Reservists as "veterans" if the disease were to develop two weeks after their aircraft returned from Africa and the aircrew returned to civilian life. 

VA answered, "No," as with the C-123 veterans. The "veteran" issue blocks VA care and benefits for Reservists and Guardsmen and exposure situations.

Researching this issue further, I contacted the Air Force Reserve Command Surgeon who said he'd resolve such an issue by generating Line of Duty determinations. AFRC is where LODs on C-123 veterans would have been initiated. He'd expect VA to respect an LOD as protection for the airmen. He would consider generating LODs months or perhaps even a year or so after an event to protect the airmen, although AFI 36-2910 specifies a limit of 180 days for Air Reserve Component servicemembers. 

For four years, USAF has taken a completely hands-off position, leaving us to VA's mercy, but perhaps somebody in a blue suit or green bag will be led to do right by us at last.

Our time frame of 1972-1986 would have to be addressed with an LOD request through the Air Force Board of Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR.) While Air Force regs specify a 180 day period to submit an LOD following an event, Secretary James has complete authority in AFI 36-2910 to waive that constraint and anything else. The Board acts with the Secretary's authority.

Any airman can submit an AFBCMR request. In this instance, I ask that VA indicate to AFBCMR acceptance of such an approach for a representative C-123 vet. Further, I hope that VA can raise the issue with Secretary James and seek her acceptance.

With the Secretaries' input with their acceptance of this approach, the AFBCMR can make its decision based on the history of the issue, the supporting documentation, the IOM and other reports, JSRRC input and the flexibility built into AFI 36-2910. 

The AFI specifies:

"An LOD determination is based upon the onset of the disease, illness or injury process, not existence of symptoms."(3.4.1.1)​

​Further:

AFRCI 36-3004

The objective of the Reserve benefit system is to compensate, to the extent permitted by law, members of AFRC who experience incapacitation or loss of civilian earnings as a result of an injury, illness, or disease incurred, re-injured or aggravated in the line of duty, and provide the required medical and dental care associated with the incapacitation.

It would be better if an LOD can even be considered by the normal Air Force channels for such decisions without the time delay involved with an AFBCMR appeal.

This could provide a resolution for the "veteran" issue otherwise dependent on the liberalizing rule and permit VA to consider claims and appeals submitted prior to June 19 2015.

Perhaps technicalities make an LOD approach or any other solution difficult, but we believe it is reasonable and just, given the facts of the C-123 vets' exposure, ailments, and difficulties receiving the same benefits as their Active Duty counterparts and C-123 vets whose claims were approved prior to the Interim Final Rule.

Please forgive the inexpert phrasing of my suggestion as my ability to research and present the issue is quite limited. We count on VA to offer the most pro-veteran assistance that is permitted.

Please stop finding avenues permitting (not requiring) VA to say "no" and instead, find ways within the law to do what's right for us.

"Never-Ending VA Appeals Process Hurts All Vets" -Yes, but appeals are for VA's errors, not veterans' greed!

Claims at VA Regional Claims Office

By Francis Rose, from Government Executive, December 2015. (Veteran's response at bottom)

One of the deepest questions philosophers have considered over the centuries is the sometimes conflict between the rights and needs of society, and the rights and needs of each individual member of that society.
The latest point in the debate over fixing the Veterans Affairs Department is a microcosm of that debate.

The claims backlog the Veterans Benefits Administration has been dealing with for years is finally below 100,000, according to numbers from late summer. The agency promoted the backlog reduction then as a sign that its management strategy was working, in contrast to scandals inside the agency’s other main branch, the Veterans Health Administration. The timing was unfortunate, though; whatever good publicity the VBA, and its then-leader Alison Hickey, might have gotten out of the news was obliterated by the scandal surrounding two employees who received enormous relocation benefits after engineering jobs for themselves outside Washington, displacing other VA officials who held those jobs.

Those numbers look different, though, in light of a Los Angeles Times article on the backlog. Given what the Times reports, it seems unlikely the agency will ever be able to make it go away. The biggest holdup to making the backlog disappear is the most politically unpalatable element of the claims process to do something about.

The biggest roadblock, the Times story makes it seem, is the veterans themselves.

The major reason the backlog doesn’t shrink any faster, the way the story tells it, is that vets submit appeals over and over again when they get outcomes they don’t agree with, hoping against hope for a different outcome. The article tells the story of one vet who did indeed get a different outcome after many tries. He’s still in the system, though – now trying to get retroactive benefits.

The reason he and the other vets do so? Because they can.

“Unlike U.S. civil courts, the appeals system has no mechanism to prevent endless challenges,” the Times’ Alan Zarembo writes. “Veterans can keep their claims alive either by appealing or by restarting the process from scratch by submitting new evidence: service records, medical reports or witness statements.”

The logistics of the backlog is complicated, and has lots of qualifications. The 100,000 number VA celebrated in August was for initial claims applications that were 125 days old. Since that number was well over half a million when the agency declared war on it two years ago, the progress looks real.

The news isn’t all good, though. The Times reports while the claims backlog has shrunk, the appeals backlog – vets who don’t like the response they get from VA and ask to have it reviewed – has climbed from 167,412 in September 2005 to 425,480 in October 2015.

“VA officials say there are two possible solutions to the bottleneck,” Zarembo writes. Those are “money to hire more lawyers, judges and other staff to process appeals, or a rewrite of the law by Congress.” In essence, the VA has pushed the backlog from claims to appeals by applying its resources to claims. It appears to be playing Whac-A-Mole with the claims/appeals process; one goes down, the other pops up.

Since more money for more staff isn’t likely, a rewrite of laws seems more possible. And that is where the philosophical question of the needs of the many versus the needs of the individual comes in. Cutting the number of appeals vets can file would make sense from a purely logistical perspective. Some vets appeal dozens of times – or more – and never win. Is infinity the right number of allowable appeals? Probably not. Is one the right number of allowable appeals? Probably not. But where in between those two is the right number? And how does Congress make that decision, as it will inevitably have to do?

Everyone in politics today wants to “support the vets.” Certainly doing anything that appears to harm veterans individually is a ticket to political trouble; I can hear the negative ads in my head already.

But endless appeals inevitably mean endless backlogs. And the person who can make the political argument that some limit – however big or small it turns out to be – will help vets collectively, will make a huge difference for the rest of the vets waiting in line for their cases to be decided.

A Veteran's Response:

Ms. Rose's essay basically blames veterans for gaming the VA system via the appeals process. "Why do they do it," she asks. "Because they can."

I say, because we must! I can only understand VA's appeals process from my own perspective, and part of that is VA's claims process as well....they cannot be separated.

Veterans currently face an average of 315 days for an initial claim to be processed. In 2012, the Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA) overturned 28.9% of the denials issued for compensation claims, and errors were found in another 46% of appealed claims. These claims were sent back to the original VA Regional Office for an additional review.

Tom Murphy, VBA’s director of compensation services, agreed that initial accuracy has a significant role in keeping down the backlog of both repeated claims and appeals. “If you’re having quality issues, it takes longer to work a case the second or third time than it takes to get it right the first time,” 

An appeal is submitted when a veteran claims VA errored on his/her claim. A claim is an initial application for benefits – medical care as well as compensation, Yes, I agree some of my brothers and sisters do submit an inappropriate number of claims, as also appeal with faint justification VA's inappropriate VA's decisions on the claims.

But: Claims are more typically for illnesses and injuries the veteran legitimately believes tied to military service. Appeals more typically are for errors the veteran believes (correctly or not) VA made in deciding the claim. Appeals mount up because of errors made by the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) in evaluating claims and also because veterans and their advocates (veterans service officers from VFW, DAV, etc.) themselves made errors in preparing claims. There are many other reasons, and certainly gaming the system is one of them, but the system's errors are basically to blame.

First among them is the remand procedure. Remands are where the Board of Veterans Appeals finds mistakes by VA in processed the claim. A remand vindicates the veteran but does nothing to resolve the claim, instead squeezing it back into the workload of the regional claims staff. The VA makes mistakes on more than 50%  of all claims it processes, most of which are never appealed.

• First Solution: Better quality initial claims decisions
• Second Solution: Faster preparation by regional offices of appealed claims for forwarding to BVA
• Third Solution: BVA must be given authority to resolve an issue without a useless remand!
• Fourth Solution: Regional offices should be given reconsideration authority when VA errors are noted while preparing appealed claims before forwarding to BVA
• Fifth Solution: VA should impose a token $10 filing fee for subsequent appeals...a vet's very first appeal is free but a $5 threshold is imposed thereafter for all appeals
• Sixth Solution: Some common sense. For instance, once the C-123 issue was resolved for post-Vietnam veterans, BVA began remanding claims with airplane details but completely outside the scope (by years, location, other facts) of the C-123 Agent Orange issue

Why a failed appeals process, choking on nearly a million frustrated claims?

1. An evolving medical situation, or age, presenting additional illnesses or injuries requiring new claims
2. VA decisions which only partially address issues claimed, leaving particulars to be appealed
3. VA's evolving rules. For instance, C-123 veterans were for years denied all benefits but ground rules changed and permitted claims and appeals
4. The veteran learns from the denied claim what proofs or arguments should have been made in the initial application, and either appeals or repeats the claim with new and material evidence
5. VA's errors in deciding claims
6. VA regional offices taking years to prepare an appealed denied claim before forwarding to the BVA; BVA actually decides appeals rather quickly once received, but the majority of the years a veteran must wait for an appeal is wasted at the regional office waiting for the claim to be readied for the BVA
7. VA has an inadequate system for veterans to request reconsideration of denied claims, and veterans too often leap to an appeal rather than a faster reconsideration process
8. VA permits no input from a vet's own VA physician in support of a disability claim or appeal, yet VA staffs the BVA with medical experts to help oppose appeals. Similarly, VA staffs the BVA with attorneys to argue against veterans' claims. An appeal is thus an uphill battle for a veteran with VA bringing in big guns to oppose a claim...and leaving an incentive to appeal
9. VA's regional office Decision Review Officer (DRO) program is overburdened by its DROs working claims and not appeals
10. One need a veteran continues with claims and appeals even after 100% service connection is granted is to address Combat Related Special Compensation requirements
11. Sometimes a veteran believes strongly an important issue is unresolved even with a 100% service connected decision on a separate issue, and seeks VA acknowledgement. Awards for 100% service connection should include language to encompass all remaining but unresolved issues under the one decision
12. Veterans service organizations should exercise judgement in supporting veterans' appeals, rather than rubber-stamping them past all reason; at some point VSOs should decline to represent a veteran any further
13. Legislation is needed to help address a failed appeals system