Showing posts with label secretary shinseki. Show all posts
Showing posts with label secretary shinseki. Show all posts

07 June 2015

VA C-123 "Fact Sheet" from Secretary Shinseki Overloaded With Errors & Misstatements; Senate Deceived

Shown below is the most significant explanation offered by the VA detailing VBA's policies against C-123 Agent Orange exposure claims. It reveals the errors, misstatements, omissions and prevarications that served as the basis for VA having refused C-123 veterans medical care and other benefits.(click for a detailed analysis of each red X.) These many challenges from veterans, although carefully substantiated, were unanswered – VA policies against C-123 veterans continued unchanged but we now see all the VA's errors and misstatements.

Although overburdened with errors, marked here with red Xs, this was provided the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee in response to Senator Richard Burr's (R-NC) letter to Secretary Shinseki, and addressed in great detail VA's many obstructions. Because it served as the vehicle to determine whether or not VA would permit medical care to C-123 veterans, it needed to be completely accurate for such an important decision...instead the red Xs show the entire document fatally flawed because we have the advantage of the IOM report, CDC and two years of the facts becoming clearer, and VA's errors becoming clearer as well.

There is no excuse for a single error on a letter from a member of the President's Cabinet to the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. There is no excuse for refusing life-saving medical care with a policy laden with such errors. There is no excuse for staff work deceiving the Secretary in such a manner.

The errors now being seen more clearly, VA is proceeding with honoring C-123 veterans' claims and will no longer follow its blanket refusal policy.

A particular flaw in this deception of the Senate is the failure to note VBA Compensation Service (which drafted this for the Secretary's signature) failing to acknowledge having received four months earlier the March 2013 Joint Services Records Research Center confirmation of C-123 veterans' exposures.

From June 2013 until the January 2015 Institute of Medicine report to Secretary McDonald, this was VA's fundamental argument, and made very formal with the two pages of "Fact Sheet." The "Fact Sheet," was cited as an authority by VAROs until January 2015.

10 January 2014

VA Secretary Insists "No Blanket Policy Against C-123 Exposure Claims" in Letter to US Senate – the facts prove Secretary wrong!

Repeating statements made earlier by Under Secretary Allison Hickey, Secretary Eric Shinseki on 7 June 2013 responded to Senator Richard Burr's letter of April 2013. You have to wonder...what happened to the staffer who wrote this flawed letter and asked the Secretary to sign it? Is he still employed?

Senator Burr had questioned the VA's universal denial of C-123 claims. He repeated several of the phrases used by VA in their C-123 disability claim denials, including the frequent "VA is unable to acknowledge Agent Orange-related illnesses as a result of this service." Senator Burr specifically suggested that:
All of this suggests that VA may essentially have a blanket policy of denying any claims based on alleged exposure to dioxin while serving aboard the C-123 planes, regardless of the weight of information submitted in a particular case."
On 7 June Secretary Shinseki reassured Senator Burr and the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee:
"...while there are no provisions for acknowledging presumptive, indirect, secondary, or remote exposure based on claimed contact outside of Vietnam or Korea with aircraft. equipment, or personnel from these locations, VA evaluates such claims on a case-by-case basis to determine if the available evidence supports service connection on a facts-found basis. In making such determinations VA applies the benefit-of-the-doubt principles contained in 38 United States Code § 5107(b) and 38 Code of Federal Regulations § 3.101 Accordingly, VA does not have a "blanket policy" for denying such claims."
Perhaps Secretary Shinseki and Under Secretary Hickey have been left unaware that VHA's Post Deployment Health Section has instructed Compensation and Pension that ALL C-123 CLAIMS MUST BE DISAPPROVED because none of the veterans has ever been exposed. Golly, this sounds to us like a "blanket policy" to deny claims. And why?

This VA perspective that C-123 vets lack exposure is via Post Deployment Health's special, uniquely VA definition of "exposure" by which VHA added the word "bioavailability" to it...no proof of bioavailability, says the VA, equals no exposure. Elsewhere in science and medicine, exposure occurs upon contact, ingestion or inhalation...and we've double-checked with the CDC/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, EPA, National Institutes of Health, medical schools and schools of toxicology. Even the Society of Toxicology's list of terms clearly explains exposure without the after-effect of bioavailability. Nowhere can we find (outside the VA Post Deployment Health...not even in other VA departments!!) any expert or medical dictionary to say otherwise. 

Let's be very clear: a cornerstone of the VA campaign against C-123 exposure claims is their denial that exposure ever took place. By slight-of hand, they deny exposure, not by saying we weren't in contaminated airplanes, but by pretending that the airplane's contamination couldn't expose us because there was no bioavailability proven. Again to be clear: exposure is one term, and bioavailability another. One is not part of the other, but they are related. (1) Exposure comes first, and (2) bioavailability may follow. But exposure, exposure, exposure! Only exposure is specified in the law. Scientists and physicians across the country have insisted to the VA that C-123 veterans were exposed via dermal and inhalation routes.

Or, as University of South Florida's Dean, Dr. Richard Pollenz explained it to the C-123 veterans on 10 January 2014:
"Bioavailability MUST follow exposure and it is a complex concept based on the chemical nature of the agent.  There is also the major concept of biotransformation since nearly all compounds are metabolized once they enter the body."   
Another expert disagreeing with the VA is Dr. Linda Birnbaum, Director of the NIH/National Toxicology Program and also Director, National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences. She told us "In all my years as a toxicologist, I have never heard of bioavailability as part of the exposure field. Exposure is contact with a contaminant."

At the University of Texas Medical School, Dr. Arnold Schecter MD, a  highly esteemed Agent Orange researcher, commented, "Any dictionary or toxicology textbook will have a definition of exposure and also bioavailability. The issue of bioavailability is a different matter." Dr. Schecter has concluded that C-123 veterans were exposed and also that, unless specific testing to prove otherwise, C-123 veterans were actually exposed to Agent Orange with resultant bioavailability.

Now back to the Secretary's earnest assurance to Senator Burr that VA has no blanket policy against C-123 veterans' exposure claims and that each claim will be evaluated individually.

Perhaps the Secretary, and Under Secretary Hickey, are also unaware of just three of the more frequently-used blanket denial policies VA employs against C-123 veterans, provided the regional offices by Compensation and Pension Service:

1."In summary, there has been no long-term adverse health effects of TCDD exposure."
Gosh, ain't it great to know that VA's director Compensation and Pension (his quote above) has decided to deny claims on the basis that Agent Orange is harmless. Ignoring the very laws they are responsible for enforcing, VA opts to disregard proven veteran exposure and instead deny claims by pretending that dioxin is harmless. Don't you feel reassured?

2.  . "VA regulations do not allow us to concede exposure to herbicides for Veteran's (sic) who claim they were exposed to herbicides after the Vietnam War while flying in aircraft used to spray those chemicals."

 Neither the Senate nor the Library of Congress can find any VA regulation as specified above. The most applicable document is the 8 May 2001 Federal Register, page 23166, where VA agrees that all exposed veterans will be treated the same as Vietnam veterans. There simply is no regulation to which the VA refers! Washington even orders the regional offices to deny the C-123 claims. Come on...that kinda suggests a blanket policy, right?

3 [From C-123 veterans' claims decisions] . "VSR. Please tell veteran, "We are unable to verify or document that aircrew members were exposed to Agent Orange resulting from Agent Orange residue or dioxin contaminated aircraft or aircraft parts. Although residual TCDD, the toxic substance in Agent Orange, may be detected in C-123 aircraft by sophisticated laboratory techniques many years after its use, the Office of Public Health concluded that the existing scientific studies and reports support a low probability that TCDD was biologically available in these aircraft. Therefore, the potential for exposure to TCDD from flying or working in contaminated C-123 aircraft years after the Vietnam War is unlikely to have occurred at levels that could affect health." 

Okay...let's look at these several issues, and see that they don't hold water.

First, with instructions to "tell the veteran" all the above to each Agent Orange-presumptive illness claimed would to anyone with a middle school grasp of English suggest a blanket policy. To repeat – it clearly is a blanket policy, despite the Secretary's earnest yet mistaken assurances to Senator Burr.

As to the issues, VA absolutely CAN (but refuses) to document and has repeatedly been provided original military documents establishing the contamination of the former UC-123K transports and the exposure aboard of the aircrews. Multiple federal agencies have tried to certify this to the VA but so far they have ignored the EPA, CDC, USPHS, CDC/ATSDR, National Toxicology Program, University of Texas Medical School, VA Regional Medical Center Portland, Oregon Health Sciences University, Boston University School of Public Health, Columbia University of School of Public Health, Dr. Wayne Dwernychuk (Hatfield Consultants), NIH/National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences University – conclusion: VA "unable to verify or document" because they simply refuse to accept all such documentation, just as the C-123 veterans were told would be the case by C&P's director.

Next, Agent Orange not only "may be" but certainly was detected...in every stored C-123 at the desert Boneyard before they were all destroyed as toxic waste.

Next, VA said it takes "sophisticated" laboratory techniques. Nope, only standard testing. The Army has the military's standard manual calle TG312, and the testing procedures done on the C-123s was standard among toxicologists and in accordance with TG312. The CDC, NIH, USPHS and EPA stand behind the AF tests proving the contamination, and from those test results, all the agencies (except VA) conclude the C-123 veterans were exposed. Because it is their responsibility for enforcing the various veterans' laws, VA feels comfortable, and indeed, somehow entitled to disregard them when dealing with C-123 vets.

The Secretary writes "detected many years after its use" to imply that somehow, age made it worse. In fact, it was worst in Vietnam when the Agent Orange was sprayed, then next-worst immediately after we started flying which was the year after the war ended, and the Agent Orange aged and became less potent over the years. His letter should say "detected for all years after its use." That's why AF toxicologist Dr. Ron Porter testified in a federal hearing that the C-123 fleet was "a danger to public health."

Our exposure, for a decade beginning in 1972, one year after the last spray missions, was quite intense, over a long period, and not to be dismissed as something noticed years afterwards. Tests from 1979 on proved the contamination! Only one C-123 was ever decontaminated, and that was at the USAF Museum on Tail #362 "Patches" and was completed fourteen years after we retired the airplane!

Next, the Secretary reports that his Office of Public Health concluded existing scientific studies don't suggest a probability of TCDD (dioxin) being biologically available. Of course, both the Secretary and the Office of Public Health fully understand that the law says nothing about Agent Orange being "biologically available," only that veterans establish their exposure. Bioavailability has nothing at all to do with Agent Orange exposure disability claims. And that's the law. 

Finally, exposure to TCDD unlikely to occur at levels to affect health. See the above...affecting the veterans' health, better known as "medical nexus," has nothing to do with claims for diseases recognized by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs as Agent Orange presumptive illnesses. Again, that's the law. If a veteran claims an illness not recognized by the VA as associated with Agent Orange, that's when medical nexus must be proven.

What a snow job. What a blanket abuse of veterans' rights!

What a blanket policy keeping C-123 veterans out of VA hospitals!


29 February 2012

Tucson Publishes Our Letter to Secretary Shinseki




By Michael Patrick Brewer         Wednesday, February 29th, 2012
 As is frequently said in my coterie of combat veteran friends, “Agent Orange, the gift that keeps on giving.” Friday, the National President of the Vietnam Veterans of America issued a public letter to the Secretary, endorsing the C-123 veterans' Agent Orange exposure claims and calling for prompt action in the face of convincing scientific proofs.

I will remind the reader, that one of the more elevated functions of blogging is to solicit more truth from a broader base than might be afforded in the dailies. If retired Major Wesley Carter, is on his game, than one could say that this topic is not much different than what the Marines have been dealing with at Camp Lejune with toxic water supplies. Truth is the first, and the last casualty of war.

The Honorable Eric K. Shinseki

Secretary of Veterans Affairs

810 Vermont Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20420

Dear Secretary Shinseki:

I chair our small group of veterans who flew and maintained the Fairchild C-123K “Provider” for ten years following the Vietnam War. These aircraft remained poisoned after spraying Agent Orange during the war, with dioxin intense enough to be labeled by Air Force scientists as “heavily contaminated” and “a danger to public health.” These aircraft should be designated Agent Orange Exposure Sites.

When we asked the Air Force and VA to investigate, we were instead given two press releases explaining that, while the aircraft “may” have been contaminated, there wasn’t enough TCDD left to likely cause long-term health problems for our veterans.

VA’s position was quickly challenged, in particular by Dr. Fred Bernam, director of the Toxicology Department of Oregon Health Sciences University and by Dr. J. Stellman of the School of Public Health at Columbia University. Further, on 26 January 2011, the deputy director of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry stated that our veterans were most likely exposed, and over a long time, and at a level about 200 times more likely to cause cancer. He also said our exposure was probably even more intense in the decade we flew, which was as much as 22 years before that first scientific testing. The ATSDR letter was certainly a game changer…how can VA possibly deny the authority of an ATSDR finding?

General, any observer would conclude that the VA’s threshold of probably has been well-met in our case. Our aircrews, maintenance personnel, flight nurses and medics have been exposed to dioxin, our parent service has confirmed this contamination and its danger, and the federal agency responsible for reaching the definitive conclusion about that has voiced their finding quite clearly. Any benefit of the doubt must rest in our favor, but there is little doubt left surrounding this issue.

We must ask that the Department withdraw its statements concerning the lack of TCDD contamination and the unlikelihood of personnel exposure. Outside scientists have called the VA’s preparation of their C-123 position “unscientific.” Some of the authors cited have specifically told VA that their works have no relation to aircrew exposure. Several of the authors cited insist aircrews have been exposed, and yet the inference of the VA reports is that the sum of evidence available speaks against a reasonable possibility of aircrew exposure.

That simply is not so. Yet, these statements discourage veterans from considering Agent Orange claims. The statements discourage VSOs from working on our claims, regardless of our proven legitimate eligibility for claiming TCDD exposure.

Benefit of the doubt is supposed to fall on the veteran’s side. We have exceeded the threshold of any reasonable benefit of the doubt, and indeed quite the opposite – there is very little doubt left about our being exposed.

As we understand it, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs can designate our aircraft (since destroyed by the USAF because of their contamination) as Agent Orange exposure sites. Please do so. If instead, some other action on your part leads to our veterans receiving medical care for their Agent Orange-presumptive illnesses, please bring us relief via that path instead.

As volunteer aircrews we willingly flew these older airplanes and accepted the extra hazards of flight inherent in them. The Army really needed these aircraft and their unique short-field capabilities, as we proved in several REFORGER exercises. Nobody knew about the contamination during the years we flew but certainly everyone knows now! Our duty was to fly, and now the VA’s duty is to address our medical concerns resulting from exposure to dioxin.

We’d be grateful for an opportunity to discuss this with you or a representative, but we’d be better served by your executive action in designating our old airplanes as Agent Orange hotspots so that we can proceed with fair evaluation of our claims.
And our claim, sir, is “Boots on the Airplane.”

Sincerely,

15 June 2011

Vietnam Veterans of America - Riding to Our Rescue!

On June 21 I received an email, followed by a phone call, from Mr. Alan Oates who chairs the Agent Orange/Dioxin Committee for the Vietnam Veterans of America. He had recommended that the VVA support our position before their membership and before the leadership of the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

His recommendation was approved by the VVA executives, and they are now behind us 100%. I was very happy to learn of their improvement of our own proposal for recognition of the C-123K/UC-123K aircraft as an "Agent Orange Exposure Site" by the addition of the Army helicopters which did much the same thing...spray herbicides in Vietnam, then return to normal military duties throughout the world post-Vietnam...and thereby exposing Army aircrews as we ourselves have been exposed.

"No veteran left behind" is their motto. As aircrew, we'd never get out of an airplane without making sure everyone behind us was out first, and safe. We take care of the pax first, ahead of our own safety. Now, that same attitude of service is how the VVA is treating our veterans of the C-123K/UC-123K group...and I am proud to be first to offer our thanks for their pro-active position and service to all veterans, everywhere. We cannot fail but to benefit from their decades of leadership on veterans' issues, expertise on dioxin, and knowledge of the ins and outs of Washington's confusing corridors. Remember: it was Commissioner Linda Schwartz of Connecticut who put our two organizations in touch!


We have many of our group such as John Harris who are also Vietnam veterans...you should all be proud of your premier organization, the Vietnam Veterans of America!

Mr. Oates email from yesterday:

Dear Mr. Carter,
I am Alan Oates, Chairman of the Agent Orange/Dioxin and Other Toxic Substances Committee for Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA).  I am forwarding an email between President Rowan and myself and what VVA is working to do on your issue.  I appreciate the information you have been sharing with me over the past month.  Please continue to provide me with update information. 
Alan
Alan Oates






Subject: Fwd: Open Letter to Institute of Medicine Agent Orange Committee

President Rowan per your request,  I have followed up on this issue.  I find the information that this group has presented is factual.  I could not write the issue up any better than their open letter to IOM (forward as part of this email).    I have gotten feedback from many of the Agent Orange (AODOTS) Committee.  They are supportive of this group.  I have not conduct a formal vote on the issue as of yet.

I recommend that we write Secretary Shinseki and ask that post Vietnam war veterans who flew, served as crew members and maintained these aircraft be granted presumptive exposure.   I also would ask the Secretary to work with DOD in identifying and determine the disposition of all helicopters used in the Agent Orange spray operations.  This is needed as the veterans who flew and maintained these helicopter would are not recognized in the C 123 groups work.


Alan

Alan Oates
Chairman
Agent Orange/Dioxin and Other Toxic Substances Committee
Vietnam Veterans of America