Aircrew Exposure to Dioxin Was PRIMARY, not Secondary!

74 AES & C-123 on Cross-Country Mission

In her 1 Oct 2012 letter, Under Secretary for Benifits Allison Hickey explained to me that the VA has no basis for considering "secondary exposure" Agent Orange claims, grouping our C-123 veterans into that category. We, however, were exposed in a direct, or primary manner! Not at all the same thing!

Let's look at "secondary exposure":
It is a simple thing. Something exposes or contaminates a second thing. Then a third thing is also exposed or contaminated by contact with that second...a secondarynexposure by the contaminant. When the third thing (or person) is exposed, that's secondary exposure.

Secretary Hickey entirely misses the point. Our airplanes remained contaminated with Agent Orange. Our intense, long-term contact with our airplanes exposed us to that contamination...in an initial, direct and primary, NOT secondary manner! Dioxin residue remained in the aircraft...important point!

Here is an occupational medicine definition of "secondary exposure":

"Secondary exposure: This term often refers to exposure to a different individual from contaminants on or in another individual, or on or in one thing from another thing; the term may also refer to exposure of a given part of an individual's body as a result of from contamination on or in some other part(s) of the individual's body."

The VA trying to stretch the truth in their secondary exposure scenario - claiming our touching some item on the C-123 that earlier itself touched and was contaminated by Agent Orange residue would not cause us harm. Perhaps so, but that is not the only way in which we were exposed...instead, our exposure was primary. We touched the dioxin itself.

Our aircraft were contaminated. Dioxin and other military herbicides remained on the aircraft until the C-123 fleet had to be completely destroyed as hazardous waste in 2012. Our exposure aboard was primary. According to the first comprehensive test done in 1994 (23 years after the last spray missions) they still were "heavily contaminated" on "100% of the test surfaces" when examined by toxicologists from the USAF Armstrong Laboratories.

But it is worst than that! We started flying these aircraft in 1972, just one year after the last Vietnam spray missions. Dioxin has a half-life of seven years on most surfaces, so the dioxin residue remaining on the C-123 was "fresh" and non-degraded. More intense, more contaminated...far more dangerous in the years 1972 to 1982 than suggested by tests completed nearly a quarter century later as General Hickey implies. Shouldn't the conclusion be that if the airplanes were a danger to public health in 2000 (as AF toxicologist Dr. Ron Porter testified in federal court), the airplanes were yet more dangerous in earlier years before the dioxin began to dissipate?

The CDC/ATSDR agrees that 1994 tests, dangerous enough in themselves, means the C-123 fleet was even more dangerous in earlier years. In his letter to the C-123 Veterans Association, Dr. Tom Sinks (Deputy Director) concludes our crews were exposed to a "200-fold greater cancer risk than the Army's screening value" suggested in the Army's gold-standard publication TG312. ATSDR even found that "TG312 likely understates the daily exposure of Air Force flight personnel in side the contaminated aircraft." The VA says our veterans were not exposed...but the ATSDR says we were and that our exposure was even worse than the "200 fold greater cancer risk" indicated by the 1994 tests. General Hickey...how bad does it have to get?


The VA's argument seems to shift. Earlier efforts to block us from medical care were advanced by the VA's Public Health folks who said the dioxin remaining on the aircraft could not expose us via dermal route because of their novel "dry dioxin transfer" concept plus the pretense that the skin is a near-perfect barrier to dioxin exposure. Science, as well as more experienced researchers, disagree completely. "Unscientific" was the toxicological scientists' description of the VA's hodgepodge of barriers raised against us.

Where VA C-123 reports belong!

We ask that the VA, our fellow veterans and the Air Force remember that the C-123 fleet came to us the year after Vietnam missions. It began being cleaned, and cleaned, and cleaned, and cleaned because the stench (from malathion and other contaminants) persisted. We cleaned those airplanes as best we could for the ten years we flew them, and even after removing all the contamination we could physically scraping and also using cleaning solvents recommended by the Air Force Material Command, we were still flying into danger.

 There was a "goop" of congealed military herbicides and malathion throughout the aircraft and especially in the wing boxes, under the cargo deck and nooks and crannies in the cargo area where spray had accumulated. Our aircraft went through at least one depot-level attempt to clean out the contamination. But the dioxin persisted, and was first identified in 1979 at the insistence of the 439th Tactical Hospital...and dioxin along with other military herbicides was confirmed. General...our contact with that goop was primary exposure! Even tests completed at Davis-Monthan in 2009 continued to show the aircraft continued to have dioxin present in all aircraft.

General Hickey, how bad does it have to get? How dedicated is the VA to creating mythical arguments to prevent us getting care for our Agent Orange illnesses? What about that "duty to assist?" Isn't anyone back at 810 Vermont on our side?

Mysteries in the Desert. Upcoming Posts - you'll want to stay tuned

Typical C-123 Veteran

It seems the gloves are off. At least, their gloves are off, because the VA and AF have mercilessly screwed us. We've been slapped around again.

As is appropriate, the US Government has recently begun cleaning up the Agent Orange mess in Vietnam, beginning in Danang. This is right and proper, even if quite late in the game.

What is not right or proper, however, is the continued failure to address the Agent Orange exposure of C-123 aircrews who flew these dioxin- contaminated aircraft 1972-1982. Working hard and in defiance of science and the professional opinions of every outside expert, an illogical VA and USAF construct has been to pretend the situation was harmless where we flew "heavily contaminated" airplanes which were "a danger to public health." But in the view of these agencies, we were somehow not exposed. We're seeing brand new definitions for "exposed."

Thus far in this year-long mess, only the VA and USAF argue that C-123 aircrews weren't exposed...but every outside university expert, every other government agency, every outside private toxicologist has concluded aircrews absolutely were exposed! Careful investigation of the situation by the American Legion and by the Vietnam Veterans of America led these associations to also agree and to demand that the Secretary of Veterans Affairs address the situation.

731st Tactical Airlift Squadron

For the first time in the history of Agent Orange issues, government agencies (in our case, the VA and USAF) have suggested a threshold of dioxin exposure below which one is "safe." For the first time, by cherry-picking their resources as well as misinterpreting various official records and ignoring contrary evidence, these government agencies have constructed a theory whereby dioxin contamination somehow didn't expose us. Their position leaves us veterans denied medical care for our dioxin exposure. Their position defies published state and federal government reports and manuals, such as TG 312.

Why? Care for Agent Orange-exposed veterans costs money. Care for our survivors costs money. In the tragic history of Agent Orange the VA has fought tooth and nail to prevent each and every veterans group from receiving service connection. First they fought the individual Vietnam vet claims. Then Congress legislated "presumptive eligibility" for those vets to stop the VA's delaying tactics. Next, the Blue Water Navy guys sought care, and got nothing from the VA but push-back until once again, Congress stepped in. So our small group of about 1500 flyers and maintenance folks are denied care. The VA, rightfully afraid of any budget drain, doesn't calculate the fact that many of us are retired military and thus covered by Tricare...we'd not need VA medical care. The VA fails to consider that we're nearly all Medicare age and thus can turn to any civilian facility for care. So our potential impact isn't too bad, but for our members who don't have Tricare or Medicare...it is devastating to have to pay for our own Agent Orange illnesses! Remember...the VA will never accept a veteran for Agent Orange-releated illnesses unless in some way Congress dictates they must! So...we need Congress! Or the Courts! Or somebody inside the VA who will treat us with compassion.

We get no sense of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the United States Air  Force approaching the issue of C-123 Agent Orange contamination with a mindset of "how may these veterans be qualified." Rather, barriers began being established the moment we turned to them for help.

In a 30-piece series of reports to the President of the United States...

1. We'll argue in our upcoming posts that VA and USAF are scientifically in error about contaminated aircraft somehow not exposing the crews and maintenance personnel. Supported by Independent Scientific Opinions from experts throughout the country, we'll argue our case with findings by other government agencies which conclude we were exposed.

C-123 Fleet Destruction, April 2010
Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ

2. We'll also reveal theft by DOD civilians of aircraft components from contaminated C-123 aircraft stored at Davis-Monthan AFB's famous Bone Yard.

3. We'll reveal $250,000 of waste and abuse at Davis-Monthan AFB and Hill AFB.

4. We'll reveal false official, signed statements by senior USAF civilian personnel.

5. We'll reveal how federal judges were deceived and how GSA purchase contracts were manipulated after award.

6. We'll reveal press manipulation and deception.

7. We'll reveal how civilian workers at Wright-Patterson AFB and Davis-Monthan AFB were required to work limited hours and wear HAZMAT protection including respirators in order to prevent deadly exposure to Agent Orange left inside the contaminated airplanes, yet the VA and USAF twisted science and logic to erroneously conclude that our aircrews, performing most of the same duties in simple flight suits during ten years aboard even more contaminated airplanes, were somehow not exposed,

8. We'll reveal sale of dioxin-contaminated airplanes to foreign governments by the USAF Security Assistance Center.

9. We'll reveal contract manipulation to deceive a GSA client.

10. We'll reveal sale of dioxin-contaminated airplanes to Walt Disney Films.

11. We'll reveal improper management of DOD civilian union employee health complaints and erroneous release of employee SSAN numbers.

12. We'll reveal improper management of formal Inspector General complaints.

13. We'll reveal how the EPA and Arizona EPA were deceived about hazardous waste, tricked into not seeing a C-123 HAZMAT quarantine area, and how a threatened $3.4 billion EPA fine was avoided by changing a couple words used to describe dioxin-contaminated waste.

14. We'll reveal how one group of veterans has been treated differently than another in similar circumstances because of budget issues and political considerations.

15. We'll reveal failures to respond to formal Freedom of Information Act requests.

16. We'll reveal JAG and leadership manipulation of Air Force technical investigations.

17. We'll reveal detailed Air Force actions taken to prevent C-123 veterans' learning of hazardous exposure, and detailed actions taken specifically to prevent exposed veterans from receiving medical care from the VA.

18. We'll reveal decades of Air Force hiding information about aircraft Agent Orange contamination.

19. We'll reveal prejudice and sarcasm by Air Force officials in respect to airlift aircrews and maintenance personnel as these veterans seek medical care for Agent Orange exposure, including situations where the veterans were publicly categorized as "trash-haulers" and "freeloaders looking for a tax-free dollar from a sympathetic Congress."

20. We'll reveal how agencies take steps to avoid receiving information which might later have to be released via FOIA.

21. We'll reveal how one agency uses another agency's work product to reach a finding, but where that second agency reaches its conclusions by citing the first agency. I know...confusing.

22. We'll reveal USAF and VA manipulation of the Institute of Medicine to prevent the IOM's release of findings in support of veterans' Agent Orange exposure.

23. We'll reveal how the VA prevented widows' claims for earned VA benefits.

24. We'll reveal how the VA prevented a handicapped adult child's claim for his father's earned VA benefits.

C-123 Fleet in HAZMAT Quarantine (before destruction)

25. We'll reveal how C-123 aircraft, if they hadn't all been destroyed in 2010 due to Agent Orange, would be today judged unsafe for flight by regulatory agencies because of the dioxin. Yet, the USAF maintains that these airplanes were somehow safe during the ten years we flew them three decades ago when contamination was even more intense.

26. We'll reveal how the USAF used tests completed in 2009 and 2010 which confirmed  aircraft were contaminated with Agent Orange yet somehow used these tests to to declare the very same airplanes weren't contaminated "enough" in earlier years to expose aircrews.

27. We'll reveal how the VA and USAF ignored science when they suggested contamination levels inside C-123 aircraft as identified in 2009 tests were somehow the same levels in 1972-1982, as though several decades hadn't passed and as though years of exposure in harsh desert conditions hadn't allowed the Agent Orange to degrade.

28. We'll reveal how VA and USAF officials exchanged information during preparation of their recent C-123 reports to insure similar negative results.

29. We'll reveal how the authors of two reports cited by the USAF and VA stated their materials were not relevant to the issue of aircrew dioxin exposure, yet these reports were used anyway to deny aircrew chemical exposure.

30. We'll reveal how the USAF retained a retired AF colonel (whose entire career focused on promoting Agent Orange uses) to support the military's decision to destroy the surplus C-123 aircraft in April 2010, and how this retiree has for decades worked tirelessly preventing veterans benefits for Agent Orange exposure.

31. There are some more revelations which I'll bring up to the AF privately as I do not want to publicize the really bad materials.

I have an awful lot of writing ahead of me. Guess I'd better get busy. Stay tuned!

Update: C-123 Agent Orange Exposure

The Army's Public Health Command has been asked to review the April Air Force C-123 Agent Orange report, in particular because of the Air Force disregard for the Army's TG312 publication. Elsewhere, we have been contacted by an independent, university-based toxicologist who is reviewing both the AF and the VA reports which he has already labeled "unscientific". Rumors are that a peer-reviewed article is coming - unlike the AF and VA reports which were internal papers without outside critical review (which they haven't survived!)
Here is an interesting question: the Air Force report dismisses the Army TG312 findings, mentioning that the Army meant TG312 for office workers, yet in that report (Chapter One, Page One), the Army states:

"Although this TG focuses on office worker exposures, the general method used to develop an exposure assessment may be adapted for other exposure scenarios by adjusting exposure fact."

Destruction of Toxic C-123, April 2010

Can you see the problem? Can you see what happens when reports are written with a pre-determined outcome and the researchers cherry-pick materials to reach that pre-determined conclusion? Both the VA and the AF needed to insure C-123 veterans were prevented from successful service-connected claims, and their reports were generated with the objective in mind. OSD must be proud!

Regarding our effort to get justice from the VA, here is where we can use some help:

Michael Turner, Ohio

1. Ohio's Congressional delegation (especially Rep. Mike Turner) should be informed re: the actions of USAFSAM's unscientific report. If the aircraft were indeed safe, why did the AF Museum spend over $50,000 to decontaminate an aircraft (Patches) which didn't need decontamination, and why did the AF spend $120,000 to quarantine the C-123s in Davis-Monthan's Boneyard. And why did the AF destroy the aircraft in 2010 if not contaminated? Answer: the planes were indeed contaminated per many tests, and only veterans' claims for service connection resulted in a political decision that we haven't been exposed!

2. We need more universities where we have our veterans (Harvard, BU, Northeastern, Amherst, Wellesley, Tufts, Dartmouth, Indiana, Carnegie-Mellon) to come on board (some already have) with challenges to the AF/VA reports - they need to decry such unscientific activities. We need our veterans (that means YOU!) to sit in front of the university experts and solicit more support - even their professional opinions in letter form are terrific support

3. We need results of our veterans' medical exams in which physicians, after examining the veteran and the medical record, find Agent Orange exposure "as likely to as not" to have caused the illness

4. We need the American Legion to seek influential experts from Johns Hopkins, NIH, Bethesda, or Howard to review the AF/VA reports

5. We need the American Legion and Vietnam Veterans of America to FOIA the entire AF background on their C-123 report or to seek it as a courtesy from USAFSAM & Colonel Benjamin, in keeping with DOD5400.7-R_AFMAN 33-302 which encourages release of information without the need to involve FOIA

6. We need Senator Patty Murray (WA), Chair of the Senate Veterans Committee, to be as involved as Senator Burr, the ranking member - they together have endorsed the Blue Water Navy so supporting us is possible. Can VVA and American Legion approach her or her staffer?

 7. We need support from the Army Aviation and Marine Corps Aviation Associations, but we won't get it is we can't get the Air Force Association behind us. Can American Legion and VVA help there?

8. We need professional societies such as the Society of Toxicology to weigh in; SOT was "sucker-punched" when T. Irons and W. Dick (VA Public Health) presented their poster display summarizing the VA's report

9. VA and AF have both constructed an argument new to toxicology - for the first time and contrary to earlier IOM reports, a suggestion is made that contamination does not result in exposure. They have dismissed inhalation as an exposure route without scientific justification. They have dismissed ingestion as an exposure route without scientific justification. And finally, by constructing a hypothesis of "dry dioxin transfer", they dismiss the dermal route of exposure. There is no science behind the VA's hypothesis that crews couldn't have been exposed via the dermal route aboard this "heavily contaminated' airplane which was "a danger to public health" (according to AF toxicologists)

10. We need the IOM back on board regarding the VA's proposed special project investigating the C-123 contamination - VA's promised Statement of Work should be submitted and publicly discussed

11. ideas?

AF Delays Brief to Senator Burr re: C-123 Dioxin Exposure

For uncertain reasons, the Air Force briefer scheduled to meet with Senator Burr's staff and teleconference participants has delayed his presentation until 11 July. We hope it is for a serious reconsideration of the mounting evidence from outside AF/VA sources which challenge such an unscientific report.

Thus far, other federal agencies as well as university experts have weighed in...none in support of the VA/AF, all in opposition. They cite the failure to respect the Army's TG312, failure to allow reasonable benefit of the doubt, failure to avoid unscientific assumptions, failure to weigh opinions expressed by the CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, failure to weigh earlier IOM exposure data regarding dermal and inhalation routes of dioxin, and failure to address the greater degree of contamination prior to the first tests conducted on the aircraft.

It is unfortunate that the issue shifts from an examination of aircrew exposure to dioxin contamination on our aircraft, to a detailed expose of why the heck the Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine pumped out such an unscientific document.

Let's hope the Air Force Surgeon gets it right this time! All we ask is the benefit of the doubt, to allow the evidence to reach the VA's "as likely to as not" threshold.

We're grateful for the powerful support of the professional societies. We're profoundly grateful to the American Legion and Vietnam Veterans of America as we continue our struggle. And we look forward to the day we can shut this web site down, go home, and with corrected AF and VA reports, turn to the VA for treatment of our service-connected illnesses.