Showing posts with label rickenbacker. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rickenbacker. Show all posts

08 February 2020

VA Just Revised Publication "C-123 AIRCRAFT AGENT ORANGE EXPOSURE CLAIMS – AIR FORCE SPECIALITY CODES AND UNITS."

Reference:
 
"C-123 AIRCRAFT AGENT ORANGE  EXPOSURE CLAIMS – AIR FORCE
SPECIALITY CODES AND UNITS."

VA corrected the dates for Westover's C-123 years, but more importantly 
has broadened the range of acceptable evidence they'll accept for all Reserve
C-123 units, and perhaps geographically separated units as well.

Our expectation, having pointed out the previous discrepancies to VA, is that our old
AFSCs will be acceptable rather than the contemporary ones VA mistakenly 
printed. Further, we identified several units not listed on their publication, and the
language on the fourth page of this publication has been very broadly expanded.

VA commits to accepting "any relevant evidence showing the required regular and
repeated contact." While not yet naming units that had C-123 duty, VA here agrees
that they'll accept most sources of official proof to support disability claims for AFSCs
and, hopefully units not yet specified.
=================================================================

US Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSCs) 1969-1986 

This is a listing of AFSCs that potentially identify former USAF Reservists and active duty personnel with regular and repeated contact as flight, medical, or ground maintenance personnel associated with post-Vietnam Operation Ranch Hand C-123 aircraft. Code numbers during the operational time frame generally consisted of four digits (with additional number/letter suffix) and many were officially changed during the time frame of operations. As a result, VA will accept any relevant evidence showing the required regular and repeated contact.

03 February 2020

Another VA Publication Error: Wrong Dates on C-123 Eligibility

Will it ever stop? Another error has been spotted on VA web pages and publications that slams the hopes of C-123 veterans hoping to quality for Agent Orange exposure benefits.

This time the error is with dates: A VA web page titled "Agent Orange exposure" specifies the dates for C-123 exposure eligibility as "On C-123 airplanes: Between January 9, 1962, and May 7, 1975." Their error, of course, was using the dates for general Vietnam War eligibility and not our post-Vietnam C-123 service dates of 1972-1986.

The mistake has been pointed out to them but this morning I repeated myself by filing another VA Inspector General report...the fourth so far asking VA to clean up their publications.

Here's a clip of their error:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Rlco4Rptc-7SphAcQst8MB4Q1WMv54wG/view?usp=sharing

20 January 2020

C-123 Veterans Association Challenges VA to Correct Agent Orange Exposure Publications

Our C-123 Veterans Association has identified numerous errors by which VA denies our aircrews and maintenance veterans earned Agent Orange benefits.

So, we today submitted a 68-page detailed analysis of these errors to as many VA managers for whom we have email addresses.

Here's what we've addressed about VA's C-123 literature:

1. 905 CAMS maintainers cross-trained on the C-123 at Westover and should have their exposure claims honored.
2. Rickenbacker's 67th Aeromedical Evacuation squadron flew their base C-123s between 1972-1986 and their exposure claims should be honored.
3. VA has failed to specify enlisted medical crew AFSCs and has for five years simply denied most of their applications, even when submitted with ample evidence.
4. Certain aerial port units at the three C-123 bases should have claims honored, particularly for ramp and fleet service staff.
5. VA failed to see the 911th AES at Pittsburgh IAP was previously named the 33rd AES, and has let the confusion lead to denied veterans benefits.

VA has had most of this sent their way for two years and has failed to act. Perhaps there is hope this time. Worth the try!


17 September 2019

SITREP: C-123 Vets' Agent Orange Claims as of September 2019

Over $20,000,000 in benefits won thus far by C-123 veterans!

That's great, but the best part of our gaining VA acknowledgement for Agent Orange exposure is medical care, always our primary objective for the estimated 2100 C-123 aircrew, aeromedical, life support and maintainers.

Last week's news included a flight nurse's appeal won for squamous cell carcinoma, and a widow's claim for her husband's Dependents Indemnity Compensation (DIC.) Her late husband died twelve years ago, well before the VA date of 19 June 2015 for recognizing our exposure, but VA accepted the fact of his lung cancer as an Agent Orange illness. I've contacted the few widows I could reach and they've also won DIC benefits (about $1300/month tax-free) but I'm afraid most have never heard of their entitlements. Can you help get the word out?

Other welcome successes include a couple Rickenbacker maintainers' claims honored by VA. I've seen some Pittsburgh veterans' claims being honored but as a group, these folks have been invisible to us...no communication other than one senior NCO. And no help from them, either, but it would be so very welcome to help get their folks informed. If ever they need a seminar on Agent Orange and the C-123 issues, all they have to do is ask!!

So far, out of about 2100 potentially eligible C-123 veterans, about 210 have had their VA Agent Orange claims honored. Sadly, as time goes along, more and more of us develop one or more of the Agent Orange presumptive illnesses and add to this number. Some retroactive awards have been well over $150,000, and our military retirees have also benefited from either Combat Related Special Compensation or Concurrent Receipt of Special Compensation.

Let me  know if I can help with anything. I'm looking forward to joining with other old 74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron members at our October 12 dinner in Springfield, MA. Care to join us??

Meanwhile, loving my Tesla Model 3 electric vehicle...best car I've ever had! I'm proud that the USA can invent, build, market and support a car that has earned Tesla the top safety award, goes 315 miles between "fill-ups," and is so cool.

27 October 2017

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.

18 October 2017

FREE legal help with our USAF C-123 Agent Orange claims (Westover, Pittsburgh, Rickenbacker, Howard, Clark)

The law firm that just won a C-123 veteran's disability appeal to backdate a claim four years wants to represent all others whose claims were submitted before June 2015 and denied, or were paid only from instead that June 2015 forward instead of per the date first submitted. 

Totally free, and you keep the entire amount recovered. They want to manage us as a group, not one at a time. Coordination is via the National Veterans Legal Services Project and the C-123 Veterans Association.

Reminder: If you are retired military, Agent Orange illnesses qualify for Combat Related Special Compensation

02 December 2016

Rickenbacker's Col. Bob Shondel passes

Obituary:
Robert George Shondel, 68, of Newport, KY, passed away on November 30, 2016 at the Cincinnati VA Hospital. 
He was a pilot with United States Air Force Reserves, serving in Desert Storm. He was the former Wing Vice Commander of the 445th Airlift Wing and former Squadron Commander of the 356th Airlift Squadron; He was inducted into the Order of the Rhino. 
Bob was a member of St. Catherine of Siena Church and a member of the Catholic Order of Foresters. He was a graduate of The Ohio State University with a degree in computer engineering and a master's of business; he retired from various leadership roles at the IBM Corporation. He was a member of the National Ski Patrol, active with the Boy Scouts of America Troop 86 and a member of the Cincinnati War Birds. 
Bob also enjoyed sailing, boating and camping. He was preceded in death by his parents, John Robert and Helen (Bidinger) Shondel. Bob is survived by his wife, Lynn (Joseph) Shondel; sons; Brandon (Rachel) Shondel and Robert C. Shondel; daughters, Cassandra (Benjamin) Greenwell and Bridget (Jordan) Sammons; brothers, William Shondel and Edward Shondel; sister, Kathleen (Dean) Blair, cousins, John (Dee) Shondel, Joe Shondel, Joyce (Paul) Oeschle and Ann Layer and many other family members. 

02 May 2016

Congratulations, Buckeye Wing on Your May 5-7 Reunion

Members of Ohio's Buckeye Wing are looking forward to a great reunion starting May 5 in Covington, Kentucky. Best wishes for good fellowship, restored memories of great flying events (or lies thereof) and service to one another!

(Don't forget to bring your challenge coin!)

26 February 2016

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.

20 January 2016

Wing Commander Assured Aircrews Patches Was Safe (1979)

Statement of Brigadier General Don Haugen, Commander, 439th Airlift Wing:
"As far as aircraft safety is concerned, although there is never a warranty, the C-123 is as safe as humanly possible."(BG Don Haugen, October 1979)
     General Haugen's reassurance came in 1979 one month after inspectors from Air Force Armstrong Labs reported residue on C-123K # 362 (Patches) of military herbicides, including Agent Orange and Agent Blue, left from their Vietnam War spray operations. 

     The general was told the airplanes were safe. The general told us the airplanes were safe. But the airplanes were not safe, and now the aircrews are blocked from exposure benefits we'd have received if USAF mistakes had been uncovered earlier. When the 1979 tests were done, no science existed to detect the deadly TCDD contaminant which was the real problem.
     The 1979 test was ordered when aircrews and maintenance staff submitted safety complaints addressing Patch's stench. The scientists concluded that Patches should be scrubbed out with Dawn detergent and air fresheners used to mask the stench. Of course, Dawn detergent did nothing to help and neither did the many years crews spent trying to scrape out the residue.
     Fifteen years later, USAF Armstrong Labs again inspected Patches, determining her to be "heavily contaminated with dioxin on all test surfaces, and "a danger to public health." Patches received a $60,000 HAZMAT decontamination and its toxicity was reduced to about 10% of the original contamination, judged safe for "occasional entry."
     Conclusion: without the decontamination, Patches certainly wasn't "as safe as humanly possible" but instead remained a source of our Agent Orange exposures. The 1994 $60,000 decontamination should have been done BEFORE we started flying Patches, not fifteen years AFTER she was retired. (In 2012-2014 the VA spent $600,000 for its consultant to oppose C-123 claims at the IOM, more than enough to have decontaminated each of the aircraft at the very first!)     
     It wasn't until January 2015 that the Institute of Medicine determined that C-123 veterans had been exposed to harmful amounts of Agent Orange while flying Patches, and that veterans' benefits were appropriate. IOM concluded that the 2012 Air Force study of C-123 Agent Orange exposure were scientifically and mathematically flawed: the Air Force (incorrectly) reported the C-123s weren't hazardous and that veterans benefits would be inappropriate.
     General Haugen was a wonderful man. I had the privilege of working for him for years, but even this general officer was misled by faulty science and an institution dedicated to denial of such problems.

14 December 2015

"Thank you" note from Ohio C-123 Veterans that I very much appreciate!

Wes,

I personally thank you for taking your personal time to help members of the Buckeye Wing.  
We are on a journey together with the VA and your efforts have helped many military people in need.

We owe a great deal of gratitude to you for what you have done for your military brothers and sisters in arms.

Tom McVey
President Buckeye Wing Association

Feel free to put in your blog


Sent from my iPhone

...and I thank you, Tom
    Wes

27 November 2015

Tricare Can Pay for Medical Travel for C-123 Vets With Agent Orange Illnesses*

Combat-Related Special Compensation Travel Benefit - offered to C-123 Vets who are military retirees with Agent Orange Illnesses!

Are you a retired military?
Were you awarded Combat-Related Special Compensation? CRSC is available for Agent Orange-related illnesses such as prostate cancer, IHD, diabetes, soft tissue sarcoma, ALS and other problems.
If you answered yes to both of these questions, you probably qualify for the combat-related special compensation (CRSC) travel benefit.

What is the CRSC Travel Benefit?

If you have to travel more than 100 miles for specialty care related to your combat-related disability, the CRSC travel benefit reimburses your travel expensesThe actual costs incurred while traveling, including meals, gas, tolls, parking and tickets for public transportation (i.e., airplane, train, bus, etc.).. If you need to see a specialist but need to travel 100 miles or more...Tricare can cover your expenses.

How do you qualify for the benefit?

To qualify, you must:
  • Get retired pay 
  • Be awarded a CRSC determination letter from AFMC’s CRSC Board identifying your combat-related disability or disabilities
  • Live in the United States
  • Be covered by TRICARE Standard and Extra or TRICARE For Life
  • Get a referral from your provider for specialty care related to the combat-related disability
  • Travel more than 100 miles from your referring provider's office to get the care
Note: If you're enrolled in TRICARE Prime or the US Family Health Plan, you qualify for the TRICARE Prime Travel Benefit, so you won't qualify for the CRSC Travel Benefit.

What can be reimbursed?

Only costs for actual travel expenses such as lodging, fuel (rather than mileage), meals, parking, tolls or other costs associated with getting the specialty care.
  • You must use the least costly mode of transportation 
  • Government rates are used to estimate the reasonable costs for allowable expenses
Please contact your TRICARE Regional Office for more information about reimbursable expenses and authorization requirements.

26 November 2015

VA Forbids C-123 Veterans' Retroactive Compensation Due Our Agent Orange Claims

In June 2015, VA published its Interim Final Rule (IFR) which recognized C-123 Agent Orange exposures. It set the date for honoring C-123 claims as June 19 2015. It has been interpreted to deny C-123 veterans' retroactive benefits for claims filed even years before the Interim Final Rule.

Years earlier, VA regional claims offices and the Board of Veterans Appeals had started receiving C-123 exposure claims with virtually all being denied. But not all.

Honored before the June 2015 Interim Final Rule were claims from Paul Bailey and Dick Matte (74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, Westover) and a handful of others from Hanscom and Rickenbacker. Just a few honored versus dozens denied.

Why were at least some honored? Because over the years that C-123 vets began experiencing Agent Orange illnesses at least some VA claims officers and BVA adjudicators obeyed the law. At least a very few claims (we've only found five) were properly interpreted by claims officers and BVA adjudicators who resisted HQ VA pressures and considered the evidence of DOD, CDC, US Public Health Service and other expert input. The law and VA 21-1MR were obeyed and at least these few claims honored. Here's why:
66 Fed. Reg. 23166 (May 8, 2001). VA explained for non-Vietnam veterans exposed to an herbicide agent defined in 38 C.F.R. 3.307(a)(6) during active military service and with diseases on the list of presumptive service connection (which includes diabetes mellitus type II and ischemic heart disease), VA will presume that the diseases are due to the exposure. 66 Fed. Reg. 23166; 38 C.F.R.  3.309(e).“ 
It turns out that one of the two the Interim Final Rule accomplishments was to make clear the legal "veteran" status of exposed C-123 maintainers and aircrew, but that was already accomplished by earlier Federal Register postings and binding Office of General Counsel precedential opinions.

The other major accomplishment of the Interim Final Rule was to block retroactive benefit awards due C-123 veterans!

Thats right...the VA's new rule served principally just to clean up the VA's opposition to our claims and to prevent our retroactive compensation due all veterans whose claims sit before the VA for years while the Department stalls. 

The loss to our veterans? In some cases, up to $200,000 each! Our claims, many filed as early as 2007 but denied justice until June 18 2015, are denied the retroactive compensation which the few C-123 claims honored before the IFR received in full, as per the law and federal circuit court actions.

We're now denied retroactive compensation which all other veterans receive once VA honors their claims.

In 2013, before the IFR was imposed on us, one of the men I worked with was overcome with emotion when he called to say the VA had deposited the $120,000 due him in retroactive compensation, money due him from the date VA first received his claim.

But this can't happen today. Even though we flew the former Agent Orange spray C-123 in manday status or annual tour (thus meeting the law's "active duty" definition described above) VA has maneuvered us out of all compensation due each of us...compensation dated from the submission of our disability claims to the VA. Even DOD regulations and VA's own rules say we were veterans once we were exposed to Agent Orange while on manday or annual tour status, but not VA today as they act behind their IFR action!

FulI Disclosure: I'm retired military and already VA 100% disabled so none of the VA's C-123 actions affect me...I'm already receiving all the VA owes me and it all comes out of my AF retirement. But anyone else in my situation, as an example, with a claim filed in May 2011 and with a total disability with special circumstances, would be due around $236,000.

But our vets won't ever see their retroactive pay, thanks to the sneaky Interim Final Rule. In at least a few situations prior to June 2015, such as with Bailey and Matte, our vets' claims were properly resolved and their retroactive pay due them was awarded. But after June 2015...not a penny will anyone ever see.

VA disregarded dozens of suggestions posted in the Federal Register prior to implementation of the IFR...just as they'd already decided to do. VA ignored our having established veteran status per the law, and instead pretended it had to construct veteran status for us and further pretended their action prohibited all retroactive compensation.

And that was their intent all along. VA was faced with the inevitable recognition of C-123 veterans'
exposure claims once the C-123 January 2015 report was released from the Institute of Medicine. VA stalled for six more months so as to block claims then, faced with action by several senators to block confirmations, yielded to permit the claims but also slapped us in the face with their scheme to block retroactive claims which we'd been waiting patiently for over these years.

Sneaky. And very wrong!

Here's what we've said to VA leaders:
A great deal of Reserve flying is accomplished in "man day" status, distinct from Annual Tour, Unit Training Assembly and Additional Flight Training Period status. Frequently, these man day tours were between a week and a month long, sometimes several times a year to accomplish cross-country or overseas airlift. 
DOD policy and AF Instruction 39-2619 state that man day tours are considered regular active duty tours, however brief. Thus, shouldn't C-123 Agent Orange exposures experienced during these periods of active duty tours entitle affected Reservists to the same presumptive service connection as other servicemembers in other active duty periods? The precedential opinions come into play here, I believe. 
If not, in what way are these Reservists' exposure injuries during man day active duty tours disqualifying as regards VA care and benefits for other active duty situations? Can I have an explanation to better inform our membership? 
Doesn't the Interim Final Rule seem to serve principally to limit (as to the June 19 2015 date) rather than facilitate, VA benefits, at least in some situations? 
It would be great if VA acted on our complaint but that's not likely. Instead, we'll have to continue bringing this injustice to the attention of our legislators and veterans organizations, and perhaps to another forum with authority to direct VA to do the right thing! Stay tuned.

19 November 2015

C-123 Agent Orange Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Benefits

Replaces VA Disability Offset for C-123 Retirees with Agent Orange-Related Disabilities - now considered combat related!
Did you know that if you are a military retiree with a C-123 Agent Orange-related disability you may be eligible to receive additional compensation through the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program? This is a new eligibility for C-123 veterans because Agent Orange illnesses are considered "combat related" because Agent Orange is an instrumentality of war.
Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Benefits
C-123 Vets may be eligible to receive additional compensation.
Until 2004, there was a law on the books that prevented military retirees from receiving both military retirement pay and VA service-connected disability compensation at the same time. Military retirees could choose to receive VA disability compensation if they were eligible, but their military retirement pay would be offset by the exact amount of compensation they received from the VA. The veteran received the same total compensation as their full retirement pay, however, the spending power was greater because VA disability compensation is tax-exempt.
In 2004, a law called Concurrent Retirement Disability Pay (CRDP) was passed. CRDP allows military retirees to receive both military retirement pay and VA disability compensation if they held a VA disability rating of 50% or greater. This is a substantial increase in compensation for these veterans who are eligible to receive their full military retirement pay and their full VA disability compensation.
But retirees with less than a 50% disability rating were left in the dark when it came to receiving greater compensation. While lawmakers didn’t extend the concurrent receipt laws to cover all disability ratings, they did create a similar law for veterans with a “combat related” disability, even if they do not have an overall disability rating of 50%. In 2008, Congress passed a law called the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) (10 U.S. Code § 1413a), which allows military retirees, including traditional Reservists, to receive monthly compensation to replace some or all of their VA disability offset if they have a combat-related injury. Let’s take a deeper look at CRSC, what it is, who it affects, and how C-123 vets can apply for this benefit.

What Is Combat Related Special Compensation?

Combat-Related Special Compensation was created to replace the VA disability offset for service-connected disabilities that are a direct result of combat related injuries, to include injuries that occur during combat or armed conflict, or during combat training, training that simulates war, while performing hazardous duty, or from exposure to an instrumentality of war (such as military combat vehicles, C-123 Agent Orange exposure, etc.).
Combat-Related Special Compensation provides compensation to eligible military retirees that will replace some or all of the VA disability offset. Their military retirement pay will no longer be deducted by the amount of their VA disability compensation. Instead, they will receive their full military retirement pay (based only on active duty total longevity, not percentage of disability!) and a CRSC payment based on the percentage of their disability rating that is considered combat-related. It’s important to note that CRSC payments only apply to the disabilities that are considered combat related. So it is possible that your CRSC payment can be less than your overall VA disability rating, and thus less than your VA disability offset. Like VA Disability compensation, CRSC payments are tax free.

Combat Related Special Compensation Eligibility for C-123 Veterans:

Here are the eligibility requirements, according to DFAS — To qualify for CRSC:
  • You must be entitled to and/or receiving military retired pay (Active or Reserve with 20 years or creditable service; Chapter 61 medically retired with less than 20 years of service; Retired under Temporary Early Retirement Act (TERA); or  retired under the Temporary Disabled Retirement List (TDRL)).
  • You must have a VA service-connected disability rating of at least 10 percent
  • Your military retirement pay is currently being reduced by your VA disability compensation (VA disability offset)
  • You must file a CRSC application with AFPC
Disabilities that may be considered combat related include injuries incurred as a direct result of:
  • Armed Conflict / Combat: This can include direct or indirect wounds which occurred during armed conflict.
  • Hazardous Duty: This can include activities such as demolition duty, diving, parachuting, aerial flight, and more.
  • An Instrumentality of War: An instrumentality of war is a device such as a weapon or weapon systems specifically designed for military duty or warfare. This can include certain military combat vehicles, vessels, aircraft, or an injury or sickness caused by exposure to fumes, gases, or chemicals. C-123 Agent Orange exposure qualifies as an instrumentality of war.
  • Simulated War: This can activities such as military training, exercises, airborne ops, live fire exercises, hand-to-hand combat training, and more. This does not include standard physical training such as running, jogging, or group sports activities.
Eligibility Based on Service Dates and Back Pay: Anyone can be eligible to receive benefits under CRSC as long as they meet the eligibility requirements. This means it can apply to veterans who retired decades ago, or as recently as a month ago. There is even the possibility of receiving back pay if you are determined to be eligible for this benefit. However, if you retired with full longevity (20 or more years of service), you can only receive back pay as early as June 1, 2003, which was the effective date authorized by Congress. If you were medically retired under Chapter 61 with less than 20 years of service, back pay can only go back to January 2008, which was the effective date for authorizing veterans who retired with a medical retirement.

How to Apply for CRSC Benefits

Combat-Related Special Compensation is not automatic. You will need to apply for these benefits with AFPC. They will assess your claim and determine your eligibility. To apply, you will need to fill out DD form 2860, along with the required documentation mentioned below, and send it to AFPC.
CRSC can be a complicated benefit because each case is unique. As always, it would be a good idea to consider using a Veterans Service Officer to help you with your benefits claims. They are often well-versed in applying for military and veterans benefits, and offer free assistance to veterans.
Documentation of Combat-Related Injury Required: You must be able to show a causal link between your service-connected disability rating and a combat-related event. You will need to provide documentation of your military service, including your Form DD-214 or Form DD-215, military medical records pertaining to your injuries, military personnel files, line of duty determinations, safety mishap (accident) reports, military personnel data system printouts, prior military disability board decisions, casualty reports, official orders or travel vouchers, AF Form 5s, flight orders, VA summary letters, or other official documents that can substantiate your claims. Here is the important thing to remember: your records must clearly show your injury is combat-related or associated with C-123 aircrew, AME, life support or maintenance duties.

02 September 2015

Finally Heard from VA – HURRAH

Good work, VA!
Yesterday I received a call from a VA service officer to discuss my Agent Orange claim. First submitted in 2011, it was personally denied by Mr. Tom Murphy's comment that TCDD (the toxin in Agent Orange) hasn't been shown to be harmful to humans. Mr. Murphy wrote that CDC, EPA, NIH, DOD, the National Toxicology Program, US Public Health Service, and the dozens of independent scientists and physicians confirming our exposures were all unqualified to confirm C-123 veterans' exposures.

Mr. Murphy insisted he was right, and the scientists and government agencies, including the Department of Defense, were wrong. In his office on February 28 2013, Mr. Murphy explained the issue had already been decided by VA's Post Deployment Public Health group in Veterans Health Administration and that no C-123 claims were to be approved. None. That's apparently what VA leaders meant by "every C-123 claim evaluated on a case-by-case basis" when the Senate accused them of a C-123 blanket denial policy. Clearly, VA had a universal blanket denial of C-123 claims, however VA chose to describe their 100% denial record.

Mr. Murphy's insistence that Agent Orange was harmless, later referred to by VA officials as "an unfortunate phrasing," doomed the claim despite reams of medical and scientific justification which first led the Portland VARO to recommend approval. Apparently VBA's Agent Orange Desk was the originator of the Murphy opinion, and for years that staffer wrote that VA had "an overwhelming preponderance of evidence against C-123 claims...not because there was any such evidence but because he felt the claims must be prevented. Actually, the overwhelming preponderance of evidence was, as the Institute of Medicine concluded, C-123 veterans were exposed and were harmed.

My claim for Agent Orange benefits per the 1991 Agent Orange Act to address Agent Orange illnesses caused by Agent Orange exposure was denied because Mr. Murphy wrote that Agent Orange is harmless. A great surprise to science and medicine which consider TCDD a potent human carcinogen.

So, too, does the CDC. They wrote VA that C-123 veterans were exposed to Agent Orange at 182-times safety threshold, and face a 200-fold greater cancer risk. Mr. Murphy wrote that CDC was not qualified to comment, nor were any other scientists qualified to comment. On February 28 2913 he explained to me that VA had already determined none of the C-123 claims were to be approved. Regardless of the amount of evidence from whatever source, every claim was to be denied because VHA Post Deployment Health had already decided the issue. Mr. Murphy expressly stated that no amount of evidence would suffice...the decision was already made to deny every C-123 claim.

Compensation and Pension ordered my claim denied. They didn't use those exact words...they just said it couldn't be approved. Seems like the same thing to me. Then VA insisted to everyone that each claim "was carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis" before it was automatically denied.

So yesterday was wonderful. I had a good conversation with an expert claims worker and now I feel encouraged that after more than four years, my claim seems to be moving along. VA is also looking over my appeals, so perhaps those won't have to wait more years in the BVA queue.

29 August 2015

C-123 Veterans' Agent Orange – Mission Complete

We're done here!

• In April 2011, C-123 veterans from Westover AFB began pursuit of Agent Orange exposure disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs for toxic injuries resulting from duty aboard the former Operation Ranch Hand spray aircraft between 1972-1986.

• In January 2012 the CDC informed VA that C-123 post-Vietnam veterans had been exposed to harmful levels of Agent Orange, and that the planes were so contaminated aircrews should have been flying in full HAZMAT protection.

• In March 2013 the DOD Joint Services Records Research Center confirmed C-123 veterans' Agent Orange exposures to VA's Agent Orange desk in Veterans Benefits Administration, which opted to disregard the input despite VAM21-1MR and the Veterans Claims Assistance Act.

• In August 2013, VA approved via DRO the only C-123 veteran's claim to ever be approved without resort to the Board of Veterans Appeals (LtCol Paul Bailey.) Every C-123 claim before and since has been denied, all with VA insisting it considered each "on a case-by-case basis"without mentioning that VA HQ ordered every C-123 claim denied

• In January 2015 the Institute of Medicine, acting under contract from the VA, issued its report to Secretary Bob McDonald confirming the C-123 veterans' exposure and likely toxic injuries.

• In June 2015 the Secretary issued his interim final rule acknowledging the IOM's conclusions, and provided formal veteran status to C-123 veterans with diagnosed Agent Orange-related illnesses, with benefits to date from June 19 2015 forward, but blocking retroactive compensation and other benefits otherwise due claims in process before the interim final rule. The first C-123 veteran's disability claim under this scheme was processed within sixteen days (LtCol Ed Kosakoski.)

• In August 2015 the Secretary of Veterans Affairs announced a compromise of a one-year retroactive disability compensation scheme. This concluded all issues of concern to the C-123 Veterans Association. [NOTE: BIG MISTAKE. A FEW DAYS LATER VA STAFFERS EMAILED US. VA "MEANT TO SAY" NO TO RETROACTIVE PAY.]

Mission Complete. 
• We accomplished most objectives, with failures along the way including four years intolerable delay by VA which we were unable to overcome. 
• We must count as failure the suffering and loss of our veterans these last four years.
• The final failure was the inability to persuade VA to award full retroactive disability compensation due veterans with claims submitted before the interim final rule, settling instead for the compromise of one year retroactivity.

This very difficult effort, led only by Westover's veterans with some financial help from other units' members, served all the men and women who flew C-123s at Westover, Rickenbacker and Pittsburgh as well as scattered Active Duty units and airmen. We did the best we would, we achieved more than experts thought possible, and we won a small measure of success when VA agreed to at least a one year retroactive program.

I believe at this point our only work is to assist fellow C-123 veterans with their claims and to serve the needs of veterans in all situations.

Thank you everyone for your support, especially the encouragements and help covering some of the expenses. As Senator Burr said, "this shouldn't have taken this long or been this hard." If I'd known how bad it was going to be when I first worried about this mess back in 2011, which was when I picked up the phone to call Paul Bailey and see how he was doing, I'd never have gotten started! I wish Paul was still here to see how things resolved for our crewmates.

Today the Dean of the School of Law at Yale said we were "fierce, strategic and unrelenting." We shouldn't have had to be – no veteran should have to self-advocate or waste years of medical retirement struggling to get VA to do its job. Four years ago VA should have called us with some reasonable solution to this horrible problem. They didn't call. Instead they fought us every step of the way. 

Our duty is to make certain no other veteran faces VA alone.

God Bless America.