The Department of Veterans Affairs has reversed its denial of Agent
Orange-related disability benefits for an Air Force veteran who flew on
potentially contaminated C-123 aircraft after the Vietnam War, a decision
advocates describe as the first of its kind for veterans seeking compensation
for postwar exposure to the toxic defoliant.
Paul Bailey, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who is gravely
ill with cancer, received notice Monday that he would receive “a total grant of
benefits” for cancer associated with his 1970s-era service in the United States
aboard the aircraft, which had been used to spray the toxic defoliant during
the war.
“The preponderance of the evidence suggests that you were exposed
to herbicide onboard
U.S. Air Force C-123K aircrafts,” said the VA decision,
dated July 31. “Reasonable doubt in regards to the exposure to certain
herbicide, to include Agent Orange, as the result of occupational hazards
onboard C-123K aircrafts is resolved in your favor.”Bailey was featured in a
recent
Washington
Post article about a controversy
concerning C-123 aircraft, many of which were destroyed in 2010 by the Air
Force. Tests in the 1990s showed that some of the planes might still be
contaminated with TCDD dioxin, a carcinogen associated with Agent Orange.
Bailey, 67, who suffers from prostate cancer and metastatic cancer
of the pelvis and ribs, said the disability compensation will allow his wife to
stay in their New Hampshire home after he dies. “The financial and emotional
support this provides is just tremendous,” he said in a telephone interview
Wednesday. “It takes a huge burden off me.”
The decision is “pivotal, and hopefully a sea change for VA,” said
Wes Carter, a retired Air Force major and friend of Bailey’s who heads the
C-123 Veterans Association. The organization contends that postwar crews should
be eligible for the same disability compensation for Agent Orange exposure
provided to military veterans who served in Vietnam during the war.
Several C-123 veterans in recent years have been granted
disability benefits after appealing denials to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals,
an administrative tribunal. But Bailey’s case marks “the first time an award
has been made short of the BVA,” Carter said.
VA
said there is no policy against C-123 claims. The department said in a statement
that it does not track whether there have been previous claims granted for
C-123 crew members but that the ruling in the Bailey case does not establish a
precedent.
“Where cases are not clear cut, reasonable doubt is always decided
in the claimant’s favor,” the agency said.
Rick Weidman, executive director for policy and government affairs
for the Vietnam Veterans of America, called the decision “fantastic news” and
added: “That’s the first case we’ve heard of that’s been successful.”
Sen. Richard Burr (N.C.), the ranking Republican on the Veterans’
Affairs Committee, was also pleased with the reversal.
“I hope this is a sign that VA will start to make decisions on
these claims based on the weight of information submitted in each case, rather
than blanket-denying every claim from C-123 veterans,” he said.
Burr and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) had asked the VA Office of
Inspector General to review whether the department is “inappropriately” denying
disability compensation to veterans who say they were sickened by postwar
contamination. “It appears that [VA] does, in fact, plan to deny any C-123
claims regardless of the evidence submitted in a particular case,” the senators
wrote in a June letter requesting the inquiry.
While stationed at Westover Air Force Base in Massachusetts in the
1970s, Bailey often flew the most famous of the C-123s, known as Patches for
the holes left by enemy fire. After it was retired to a museum, tests by Air
Force toxicologists in 1994 found that Patches was “heavily contaminated” with
dioxin.
Bailey’s claim for disability benefits was denied in February by
the office in Manchester, N.H., which wrote that “VA regulations do not allow
us to concede exposure to herbicides for Veterans who claim they were exposed
to herbicides after the Vietnam war while flying in aircraft used to spray these
chemicals.”
Bailey appealed the denial decision in April, and this reversal is
considered to have been very fast.
In a statement Wednesday addressing the VA reversal, Brad Mayes,
director of the Manchester office, said “the issues described in Lt. Col. Bailey’s
claim illustrate the difficulty VA faces when evaluating whether a particular
veteran’s claim of Agent Orange exposure outside of Vietnam has merit. VA
considers these issues on an individual basis, along with any other evidence
available.”
Burr said he is “concerned that there are other veterans who did
not receive this same level of attention to their claims.”
The Washington Post gave high praise to the Department of Veterans Affairs, reporting that the VA web site ranked Number One in what most would perceive as value and importance to American democracy. The Post suggested that the better the web site, and the better job that site did serving its visitors, the better for democracy.
Our dear friend Paul Bailey passed away yesterday in Bath, New Hampshire.
In their letter submitted Monday, October 22, representatives from both parties joined Congresswoman Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) and Congressman Paul Cook in demanding the VA recognize C-123 veterans' exposure to Agent Orange. The deadly toxin contaminated the fleet of C-123 warplanes, used earlier in Vietnam for spraying Agent Orange.
VA Needs to Improve Claims Decisions, vets tell Congress:
