Our association's second response to proposed new VA regulation on veterans' hazardous exposure issues.

Our association has posted a second response to the proposed new VA regulation covering veterans' hazardous exposure issues. (First response here.)

The proposed regulation does much to address a wide range of exposure locations and does finally address members of the Reserve Components. It does not mention three earlier failed assurances by the Department of Veterans Affairs in the Federal Register that it would care for veterans who did not serve in the Republic of Vietnam, but were exposed to herbicide agents. Pages from the Federal Register are attached (Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 89, May 8, 2001 and Vol. 73, No. 74, April 16, 2008 and Vol. 75, No. 168, August 31, 2010.)

Instead, Veterans Benefits Administration took steps to insure veterans were refused all care and benefits they should have received for their exposures,  dishonoring VA responses published in the Federal Register.

Between 2001 and 2010, the Department of Veterans Affairs proposed important regulatory changes in the care offered veterans exposed to military herbicides. Responding to public concern for veterans exposed in situations outside the Republic of Vietnam, in three separate and deceptive answers, the VA specifically said no regulatory changes were needed or would be made because:

"If a veteran who did not serve in the Republic of Vietnam, but was
to an herbicide agent defined in 38 CFR 3.307(a)(6) during active military service, has a disease on the list of diseases subject to presumptive service connection, VA will presume that the disease is due to the exposure to herbicides. (See 38 CFR 3.309(e)). 

We therefore believe that there is no need to revise the regulation based on this comment."

By implication, these three deceptive VA responses it also assured Congress that no legislation would be necessary for protection of the affected veterans because the VA had already arranged to offer the same full range of exposure benefits provided Vietnam War veterans.

VA was deceptive between 2001 and 2015 in that, despite assuring the public and Congress that veterans exposed to military herbicides would receive benefits, it instead routinely refused to honor virtually all such claims. A VBA physician and Agent Orange subject matter expert with the "Agent Orange Desk" stated to the Associated Press, "We have to draw the line somewhere." 

The C-123 Veterans Association believes any such "line" may only be drawn in accord with law and regulation, not the preference of VBA staffers determined to block veterans' valid herbicide exposure claims.

VA Regulation M21-1 required it check with the Joint Services Records Research Agency for support of non-Vietnam exposures, but then refused confirmation when offered unless the Agent Orange Desk first requested such confirmation. In many instances, the Agent Orange Desk either refused to make such a request or wouldn't accept JSRRC confirmation even when offered.

This is not ancient history. Veterans and their families were assured of exposure benefits by theVA with empty, dishonored promises made in the Federal Register but were denied those benefits. Note must be made as VA seeks to publish this newest regulation to address earlier failures and deceptions on the same subject.

Respectfully submitted,

W. Carter, The C-123 Veterans Association

Senator Burr (NC) Statement on C-123 Agent Orange Claims

Bipartisan Group of Senators Urge Action from VA for Care & Benefits of C-123 Veterans Exposed to Toxic Agent Orange

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Richard Burr (R-NC), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) wrote to Department of Veterans’ Affairs Secretary Bob McDonald requesting that the department utilize its existing statutory authority to provide care and benefits to veterans exposed to toxic herbicide residue decades ago while they served on aircraft used to spray Agent Orange in Vietnam. 

“Justice for these veterans is long overdue and you have the authority and the ability to finally right this wrong,” the Senators wrote. "For nearly four years, the VA denied these reservists’ exposure to toxic Agent Orange residue in contaminated C-123s. On January 9, 2015, the Institute of Medicine issued a final report… which ‘emphatically' rejected VA’s assertion as to exposure. As a result, we understand you conceded that this group of veterans was, in fact, exposed to toxic Agent Orange herbicide. However, we also understand a question has arisen about whether some of these reserve airmen satisfy the statutory definition of ‘veteran' for purposes of eligibility for VA benefits. We fundamentally disagree and believe VA’s precedential interpretations of the relevant statute and the policy principle and legal precedent of construing statutes in favor of veterans requires VA to find these reservists eligible for benefits. We ask that you stand by those interpretations, which we outline in this letter, and which show that no additional statutory authority is necessary for you to immediately begin providing care and benefits to the C-123 veterans.”