National Academy of Sciences on Financial Disclosure

In 2014, the Institute of Medicine C-123 Agent Orange committee had a presentation by a scientist who did not offer information about his $600,000 consulting contract with the Department of Veterans Affairs. Both he, and the Department, opposed C-123 veterans' arguments as to Agent Orange exposure aboard the former Agent Orange transports.

Because the VA proposed the question to the Institute of Medicine, it was improper for it to advocate a particular finding by the IOM. The consultant explained, in his preface to comments to the committee, that he was not there to represent the VA but to explain the science behind the VA's perspective on C-123 Agent Orange exposures. However, never did he discuss his unusual historical involvement with the VA and the US Air Force, and the C-123 veterans, including his personal role in 2009 recommending destruction of those aircraft.

At the time of the IOM meeting, it seems only VA was aware of the consultant's unusual no-bid, sole-source contract addressing post-Vietnam herbicide concerns. Later, the committee was informed that the scientist had a consulting relationship with the VA, and at some point after that, the amount of the contract was also made known to the committee by IOM staff.

Veterans and others presented IOM their financial statements; even the authors of papers sponsored by Dow and Monsanto met this fundamental ethical obligation. But not the VA consultant. The VA took no action, even though it had several representatives at the IOM hearing well-aware of the issue.

This writer is no scientist, and the nuances of this profession's ethical considerations are unfamiliar. Perhaps the consultant and VA were perfectly proper in the IOM presentation. It is hard, however, to find any positive spin to put on this: VA paid a lot of money to oppose veterans' Agent Orange exposure claims, and failed to reveal anything about this. Most of the work product of the consultant's contract was submitted in opposition to the veteran's claims, and nothing that was helpful...his view was quite clear and only information supporting that view was offered, a view he has espoused for decades.

This would be acceptable in a high school debate, but not as the National Academy of Sciences tried to address the health concerns of thousands of veterans.

In addition to tremendous amounts of its staff resources, VA spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to oppose the veterans. Not a penny was permitted to support the veterans' presentation to the IOM in which we argued that we'd been exposed Thus, VA presented its policy to the IOM, not an even-handed scientific analysis.

The VA was hardly neutral and should not have posed this question to the IOM with their ill-disguised objective of using IOM to obstruct veterans' exposure claims. VA selected only materials, reports, opinions and other materials for the IOM which argued against the veterans, withholding everything helpful to the veterans' cause. The only materials supporting the veterans' perspective were submitted by the veterans, by unpaid concerned scientists and physicians, or obtained by the IOM itself.

VA showed it was not seeking an objective examination of the C-123 Agent Orange exposure claims. Veterans were entitled to advocate the basis of their situation, but VA was supposed to be not only objective, but pro-veteran, and seek a clean scientific analysis through IOM of the issue. VA failed.

On March 8, 2015, the president of the National Academy of Sciences addressed the issue of financial disclosure and the importance in science that that ethical requirement plays. Although the particulars of his address dealt with climate change, the fundamental ethical problem is identical to the C-123 Agent Orange meeting:

By National Academy of Sciences President Ralph J. Cicerone
     March 6, 2015

The methods, motives, and results of scientists come under special scrutiny when
societal or economic matters are involved, for example, in cases involving medicine and health, governmental policies and regulations, and commercial applications.  Recently, two new examples have arisen, both involving the science of climate change and societal responses to it.  

One case involves allegations of failure to disclose financial interests and research support from corporate interests on the part of a researcher at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics who testifies on behalf of organizations that discount the role of human activity in global climate change.  The other consists of requests to seven universities by Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.) for the names of funding sources for a group of scientists and policy analysts who have publicly disputed widely accepted scientific findings about the causes of climate change and the value of public responses to it.  An earlier Congressman’s request for professional and personal materials should also be remembered. 

These incidents and prior ones show that scientists must disclose their sources of financial support to continue to enjoy societal trust and the respect of fellow scientists, while also maintaining high standards in the enterprise of science. 

Stars & Stripes 15 Mar 2015: "VA C-123 Decision Delayed"

Pretty alarming, after the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee budget hearing and subsequent VA statements regarding upcoming announcements. We'll just have to keep faith.

"Fixing the VA, A Broken System Thus Far" – comments by Secretary McDonald and Deputy Secretary Gibson

The President, Secretary McDonald and Deputy Secretary Gibson are visiting VA facilities in Phoenix, Arizona this Thursday and Friday. The Arizona Republic, which has uncovered much of the turmoil in VA this last year of scandals, raised questions of these leaders.

Arizona Republic: "You inherited a malignant VA culture with dishonesty in leadership and other problems. How can you trust your subordinates to cure themselves or be honest with you?"

Secretary McDonald: "Ask every employee to recommit themselves to our mission."

Mr. Gibson: Stressed that veterans are poorer, sicker and have more mental-health problems than most patients. "These are not patients that are going to fare well in a fragmented, private-sector care environment."

Mr. Gibson's point is quite clear...veterans need the VA. Which begs the question, why has VA blocked 100% of our eligible C-123 veterans' applications for VA medical care for four years? How can VA claim to be pro-veteran and non-adversarial when it seeks every loophole to bar our care?

C-123 Agent Orange Source Documents List Updated

Updated this week, our C-123 documents are provided here with hyperlinks, and in reverse
chronological order.

Click to download the Word DOC file (300K)

VA Now Reporting C-123 Agent Orange Press Announcement Delayed Past Next Week - date uncertain

More news...all confusing!

After telling Senator Brown of Ohio, and the rest of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee and veterans nationwide that VA would announce its C-123 Agent Orange program by last week, only to learn it was postponed to this week, with word yesterday it had been rescheduled to next week...we have just learned (at 2:51 PM MST) that faxes from VA public affairs have been sent out canceling that announcement also and now no date is even suggested.

What the heck is going on? The C-123 veterans are only a little blip on the VA's big radar screen, not significant by ourselves other than the moral weight of the Secretary's decision. To us as the veterans who want to be VA patients, even another week kept outside VA hospital doors is a painful week.

Delays might be caused by budget conflicts, travel schedules or other reasons, but it is hard to imagine a response given a senator being so casually ignored in its fulfilment. Is the cause something more sinister? 

Did the Blue Water Navy case being dismissed have anything to do here, or maybe the introduction of the Agent Orange Equity Act? 

We're the principal stakeholders, with our health and well-being at risk, yet we've heard nothing from our phone and email inquiries. The media has heard only delay after rescheduled delay, and our legislators say they know nothing.

What the heck is going on?

VA Announces Another C-123 Announcement Delay

Reported today in the Pittsburgh Gazette:

By Torsten Ove / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

A Department of Veterans Affairs announcement regarding new Agent Orange benefits for Air Force reservists who flew on C-123 transport planes in Pittsburgh and elsewhere has been delayed again until next week. (note: a subsequent email from VA further delayed the announcement and stated that no date has been set.)

The announcement by Allison Hickey, undersecretary of benefits for the VA, was supposed to be last week and then was moved to this week, but it's been pushed back once more because the details are still being worked out, a VA spokesperson said. A fleet of the giant C-123s was used in Vietnam to spray Agent Orange defoliant.

After the war, the Air Force removed their spray tanks removed and supposedly decontaminated the planes before returning them to duty in the U.S. at the 911th air base here and two other bases in Massachusetts and Ohio.

Some 2,100 crew members, flight nurses and mechanics who flew on the C-123s or serviced them from 1972 to 1982 have long suspected that the planes remained contaminated with dioxin, the toxic chemical in Agent Orange, and that their medical problems are the result of exposure. They say they should be eligible for the same Agent Orange benefits that all veterans who served on the ground in Vietnam receive, but the VA has denied most of their claims over the years.

A recent report by the Institute of Medicine, however, concluded that C-123 reservists were probably exposed to dioxin.

The VA is expected to announce that Agent Orange benefits will now be extended to all C-123 veterans who are eligible.

VA Claims Progress...slow but sure

Slow, but sure progress.

VA's current report shows that claims on-hand have dropped to about half of 2012 levels. Their report also shows that their "backlogged" claims...those over 150 days old...have dropped to about a third of previous levels but still represent too large a percentage of all claims...nearly half.

VA also reports the success of its Fully Developed Claim process, whereby the vet, the vet's service officer helping with the claim, and the vet's medical team submit all the documents necessary for VA to reach a conclusion. Clearly the FDC process has reduced the inventory of claims in the mill and also greatly reduced the number of backlogged claims.

But the problem: even the FDC process barely manages to process claims just before reaching the backlogged status of 150 days.

Fully Developed Claim Chart

A Proposal: New VA Motto

 

Mentire, negare, sperare se mori*

I like the VA motto "I care" but so far, it is unearned although they're trying hard to deserve it. Until then, they should use the one above instead.

Let's challenge VA to start from this unofficial but completely appropriate motto, and work towards where that institution belongs in American government fulfilling its responsibilities towards veterans. Then, we can agree they care.

*Mentire, negare, sperare se mori (Latin: "Lie, to deny, to hope that he is dying")

What Does Secretary McDonald Need For C-123 Agent Orange Presumptive Eligibility?

Nothing. Everything is in place already for VA to act now to provide C-123 veterans Agent Orange presumptive eligibility. He should just hit the big red button to the right, and ACT NOW.

Nothing else required. No new law. No new legislation. No new regulations. No new rules.

Nothing. For many years, VA has had everything to do its job for C-123 vets, with far, far more effort put into blocking these veterans than in helping them.

For most of the C-123 veterans' needs, VA has all authority to begin providing care today. Perhaps some related issues such as veteran definition, BVA actions or other questions will need fine tuning via new regulation. Nothing that can't be resolved quickly.

The bulk of C-123 veterans need only VA's decision to obey the law and stop the improper blanket denial of all claims. VA can and should make that decision immediately.

The 1991 Agent Orange Act, Title 38, and VAM21-1MR are all in place and address our veterans' needs. VA even has repeatedly stated in the Federal Register that nothing else is needed – non-Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange are provided presumptive eligibility.

Their 2010 Federal Register statement used the language "we wish to make clear" that exposed veterans will receive presumptive service eligibility, and with that, recognition of Agent Orange illnesses as line-of-duty illnesses. VA used the language "We therefore believe there is no need to revise the regulation..."

Mr. Secretary, no new rules are needed to make clear what VA has already made perfectly clear. Mr. Secretary, the VA Office of General Counsel already defined Reservists as "Veterans" under the law:

"The VA Office of General Counsel has held if the evidence establishes that an individual suffers from a disabling condition as a result of administration of an anthrax vaccination during inactive duty training, the individual may be considered disabled by an "injury" incurred during such training as the term is used in 38 U.S.C. §101(24). Consequently,such an individual may be found to have incurred disability in active military, naval, or air service for purposes of disability compensation under 38 U.S.C.§1110 or 1131. VAOPGCPREC4-2002,69 Fed.Reg.25176(2004).
In the VA Office of General Counsel opinion, the Veteran was a former member of the Army Reserve who received two anthrax inoculations during inactive duty training. The Veteran alleged suffering from chronic fatigue and chronic Lyme-like disease as a result of these inoculations. The General Counsel held that the Veteran may be considered to have been disabled by an injury in determining whether the member incurred disability due to active service. The General Counsel reasoned that inoculation with a vaccine involves the introduction of a foreign substance into the body and that, while the substance is intended to and generally does have a beneficial effect,adverse reactions,sometimes of a severe nature,may result. Additionally,the term "injury" in section 101(24) may be interpreted to include harm not only from a violent encounter but also from exposure to a foreign substance, such as a vaccine. The General Counsel found that the concept of "trauma," which is recognized as the cause of "injury," encompasses a broader definition that includes serious adverse effects on body tissue or systems resulting from introduction of a foreign substance. Thus, an adverse reaction to a vaccination may be considered an "injury" as that term is used in 38 U.S.C.§101(24). See VAOPGCPREC4-2002"

Mr. Secretary, there is no need to turn to Congress for legislation because VA has already told Congress no extra legislation is needed for VA to meet its responsibilities to C-123 veterans.

Veterans can take the VA at its word, especially when thrice-published to Congress and the public in the Federal Register. VA has made it clear that no new regulations are needed for C-123 veterans, as well as any other veterans, who have been exposed to Agent Orange to be treated for that exposure by the presumptive service connection.

VA has even added a little extra justification for recognizing C-123 veterans, perhaps the only step ever taken that helped these vets. Because some staffers in VA challenged the C-123 veterans' exposure and the bioavailability of the dioxin from the airplane, VA sought input from the Institute of Medicine which confirmed the airplanes' contamination and the veterans' exposure. And harmful effects of that exposure. First proposed in 2012 but canceled by VA, the study has made veterans wait another year to complete but is now in hand for VA to do what it should have done with the first C-123 veteran's claim in 2007.

In fact, VA lacks any regulation or rule permitting Compensation and Pension Service to deny all our claims as they now do, their blanket denial even though that phrase is not used. VA has no authority for refusing these qualified claims, especially now that Joint Services Records Research Center confirmation has been received.

Mr. Secretary, it is past time for that announcement you promised the Senate!

(VA's Federal Register post, 31 Aug 2010)

VA: C-123 Veterans' Service Connection – NOW!

The C-123 Veterans association is joined by other service organizations in calling on Secretary McDonald to recognize our aircrew and maintainers' Agent Orange presumptive service connection. 

It has been long enough.

Paralyzed Veterans of America Adds Its Support to C-123 Veterans' Agent Orange Claims

Today the Paralyzed Veterans of America joined with other service organizations to voice support for C-123 veterans' Agent Orange claims. This was first through direct conversations with Secretary McDonald, and more recently by PVA leadership approving addition of their name to the list of C-123 supporters!

Thank you, PVA!

Wes Carter, PVA Life Member since 1991

Disgusting VA Sarcasm, Cartoons & Jokes About Veterans' Suicide

The Indianapolis Star reported a VA clinician's sarcasm aimed at veterans' suicides. The report was repeated today in the Washington Post.

Indianapolis VA sarcasm and cartoons about veterans' suicides.

I have sought help myself and wonder if this is how I was seen. Palo Alto WIISC?

Reading stacks of VA emails and letters released under the Freedom of Information Act suggests exactly that. Big joke. They not only fight us, they laugh at us. We're funny, even with a pistol to the forehead or a noose around our neck...we're funny to them.

To the point of death, the very clinicians called on to help still mock us. The VFW has called for the manager who taunted us so to be fired, but that will change nothing of substance.

This stuff is starting to hurt beyond all endurance. What is wrong with these people?

Why Were The C-123s Destroyed by USAF in 2010?

C-123 HAZMAT Quarantine Area

Because they were toxic. Because veterans might learn of the toxic exposures and turn to VA for
medical care (AF agreed this was to be prevented.) Because USAF sworn testimony in federal court was that the airplanes were "a danger to public health" and could never be sold or parted out.

Apparently, being a threat to public health had no bearing on whether the crews who flew them years earlier might need to be alerted to toxins and their health concerns.

And the planes also had to be destroyed...quickly and quietly...because of a threatened $3.4 billion EPA fine. $32,000 per day, per airplane. Good thing the EPA had never been fully informed of the Bone Yard's special C-123 HAZMAT quarantine area, but the toxic airplanes couldn't sit behind that "restricted access" fence forever. There were even concerns that rainwater off the airplanes might contaminate the soil beneath them.

But $3.4 billion was a stand-alone major focus, and compelled action. Unless they could continue the cover up, a $3,400,000,000 for an EPA fine is not a mistake Hill or Davis-Monthan AFB officials wanted to have on their annual efficiency reports – not much efficiency in such a monumental fine. So the planes had to be destroyed, and it had better be done very, very quietly.

And it was. Nobody noticed. Ever. And the exposed veterans didn't notice, either, and didn't know we'd been exposed to harmful levels of dioxin until years later. A great success for Hill AFB Public Affairs.

In 2014, a VA consultant told the Institute of Medicine the C-123s were destroyed "because they were obsolete." He did not mention the fact that in 2009 he'd personally recommended destruction of the airplanes due to their toxicity and to prevent veterans' claims.

Here's the AF memo detailing concerns about the EPA fine:

My Agent Orange Claim: Four Years Old This Month

VA Claim still denied after four years waiting!

2011 just wasn't a super year for me, health-wise.

2011 also proved to be a terrible year to submit an Agent Orange claim. But as it worked out, that frustrated claim afforded me a tremendous sense of purpose in helping the men and women I served with between 1974-1980. I guess it was one path to acceptance of what was happening to me.

2011 is when I learned I had cancer and heart disease, and had heart surgery in Portland Oregon. As I learned more about my illnesses, I realized that other folks from our squadron were in the same predicament: I had the thought that information uncovered by preparing my claim would help the men and women I flew with who'd also been exposed.

2011 is thus when I began more active interaction with the Department of Veterans Affairs. In addition to being asked why I was submitting a disability claim when I was already rated 100% disabled, it also earned me the wrath of VA staff, which labeled me "persistent" and "adept at gathering legislative influence." Perhaps.

My wife and I talked it over and agreed it was a worthwhile family commitment for our time and money. I'd been a Medical Service Corps officer in the Air Force for years and a medic before that, a little background which might help. Back then, I didn't expect this project to take four years, but neither did I expect to be around this long.

Soon after I was diagnosed, I submitted a disability claim to the Portland VA for these recognized Agent Orange illnesses.

Four years on, even with each requirement in VA's regulation VAM21-1MR satisfied, even with JSRRC and IOM confirmation, it remains denied by the VA. It moves along, if indeed it moves at all, with the same glacial pace as with all other veterans' claims. It is in line for eventual consideration by the Board of Veterans Appeals, although it hasn't even been forwarded to the BVA but instead has sat for two years at the Portland VARO: BVA appeals can take three to five years, longer than the remaining lifespan of many veterans awaiting decisions.

Adjudication by the BVA takes only a few months once it has the claim. The longest part of the appeals delay is simply the years each regional office takes to putting a disputed claim in the mail for that hearing.

Claims sit in stacks, either physical or digital, for years. VA rules prohibit treating veterans' ailments, regardless of how life-threatening, during those years until the claim is decided. There is such a backlog of BVA appeals that the local office can't offer a guess as to when the claim might be heard.

Despite the unresolved claim for my Agent Orange-related illness, other injuries happen to provide my eligibility for VA care.  I am something of an exception among Reservists from this era. Like other veterans of the Gulf War or other conflicts, my own medical needs are already met by VA, TriCare and MediCare. After my injury, I was 100% medically retired from the Air Force as well.

Because I'm already 100% VA service-connected, rated "catastrophically disabled" by VA and eligible for all VA care, outstanding treatment is provided for my Agent Orange-related illnesses as well as all other ailments. However, most of my crewmates aren't able to turn to the VA for anything, and even their Agent Orange claims are refused...every single one of them. Working my claim, and discovering everything necessary to win VA's approval for our Agent Orange-related claims, would help our other C-123 veterans experiencing illnesses recognized as associated with toxin exposures.

I substantiated my own VA claim not only with the required medical evidence, but also proof of the exposure event because it was unusual:  Many of my squadron's C-123 transports were used for spraying Agent Orange in Vietnam. My claim was that, although I didn't serve in Vietnam, I was exposed via inhalation, dermal contact and ingestion routes of exposure to herbicide residue in the airplane.

Also submitted was USAF proof that planes from our squadron was tested "heavily contaminated with dioxin (the toxin in Agent Orange, also referred to as TCDD) on all test surfaces." That proof wasn't easily gathered from the Air Force...requests for it were denied for years until partially released under the Freedom of Information Act. But only partially. It has taken a suit in federal court to get even a fraction of the information about our exposures released. For some reason, these USAF documents often have hundreds of pages completely redacted...information about our health kept from us.

VA was prepared for claims from veterans with non-Vietnam exposure events – that is, prepared to deny. However, VA also took pains three different times to clearly ("clearly" was the word VA used) spell out to Congress and the public through the Federal Register the department's commitment to care for those exposed outside Vietnam with the same presumptive service connection as Vietnam's "boots on the ground" vets. VA subsequent actions in denying all such claims was in conflict with law, VA regulations, ethical standards it set for itself, and commitments made to veterans and Congress.

Expecting that I'd have a difficult time submitting the claim and persuading the VA, I sought confirmation of both the contamination of the airplanes and the harm that exposure caused, these being VA's requirements in VAM21-1MR. The Center for Disease Control evaluated Air Force source documents and then provided expert input from its Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

The CDC reported that our airplanes were contaminated and our exposures well beyond safety standards. The extra information that cancer risks were increased by 186-fold was what I found staggering. CDC said our C-123s were so contaminated we should have been flying and maintaining them in full HAZMAT.

All these proofs...nearly one hundred, didn't help the claim one bit. The claim was denied in 2012. VA disputed or ignored all the medical and scientific support. VA's Compensation and Pension service even took pains to somehow falsely summarize the CDC confirmation of my exposure with their sentence, "In summary, there is no conclusive evidence of TCDD exposure causing any adverse health effects."  

Clear? CDC said I was exposed with a 200-fold increased cancer risk, but VA denied the claim because TCDD is harmless. TCDD? That's the most toxic of toxins, and universally recognized, even by VA, as a human carcinogen. TCDD is the contaminant that made much of the Agent Orange used in Vietnam into a poison.

VA dismissed all the scientific evidence, stating VA had an "overwhelming preponderance of evidence" against my claim. And also, dismissed every C-123 veteran's claim. VA raters also denied C-123 veterans' claims by using the phrase, "regulations forbid recognizing non-Vietnam herbicide exposures." There are no such regulations, of course as VA later agreed when challenged.

In response, VA simply told raters to deny claims but using other phrases, directing all C-123 claims denied regardless of any evidence. This is according to the director of Compensation and Pension in Veterans Benefits Administration. Meeting with him in 2012, we were told no amount of proof from whatever source would permit a claim to be approved.

Denying a claim by pretending TCDD was somehow harmless meant VA denied an Agent Orange claim under the 1991 Agent Orange Act, because Agent Orange was harmless. VA's position was the toxin in Agent Orange causes no adverse health effects, so my claim for illnesses recognized by VA as Agent Orange-presumptive illnesses was denied because toxins in Agent Orange are harmless.

VA's twisting logic and proof makes my head spin. Even VA executives later reported the language denying my claim was "an unfortunate choice of words." What they meant was that the claim had to be denied whatever the reason VA could create, but some other reason should have been found...anything, just get the claim denied regardless of supporting evidence. Type anything, be creative, but deny the claim.

VA's "overwhelming preponderance of evidence" against my claim actually turned out to be a staffers' phrase describing two letters (one from a Dow-sponsored scientist and one from a Monsanto-sponsored scientist, neither of whom ever reviewed my claim,) plus a VA contractor who explains that Agent Orange is harmless. Frequently in VA's internal communications, that phrase was tossed out so routinely everyone in the department came to accept it as a settled fact. The characterization of VA's meager amount of contrary materials as an "overwhelming preponderance of evidence" doomed C-123 claims for years.

But there was no such preponderance: What little VA had paled in comparison to the veterans' evidence. VA even cited its own web pages as scientific evidence to belittle veterans' claims – part of that non-existent overwhelming preponderance.

VA staffers at the "Agent Orange desk" in Compensation and Pension were personally determined to prevent any non-Vietnam exposure claims such as ours. "We have to draw the line somewhere," VA leaders informed the Associated Press. No mention was made of the law, or VA's own regulations which should have insured approval of claims from C-123 veterans.

When other agencies such as DOD's Joint Services Records Research Center tried to provide VA persuasive source documents about C-123 exposures, VA refused to accept them, blocking JSRRC support of the veterans' claims. VA even refused to accept findings from the CDC/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry confirmed by Rear Admiral R. Ikeda, MD US Public Health Service, calling such evidence from other federal agencies the real problem and "unfortunate."

So, four years ago VA's imaginary "preponderance of evidence" was used to deny evidence from dozens of scientists and physicians, as well as confirming opinions about my exposure from CDC, US Public Health Service and the National Institutes of Health.

All of it from unpaid experts, stacks of it, but useless against VA's two letters, its Agent Orange consultant, and staff preferences.

It was this unofficial policy of some staffers in VA's benefits organization, not law nor science, which condemned every C-123 claim and denied benefits due these veterans. But the arguments from veterans continued, amplified by media, scientific evidence, peer-reviewed research and legislative attention.

Finally in 2014 the National Institutes of Health gave an in-depth evaluation of all the science and evidence regarding the C-123 airplanes' contamination and exposure of the veterans who flew and maintained them. The final report: C-123 veterans were exposed. VA was wrong all along.

In the near future VA will announce changes in how it handles C-123 veterans' claims. Probably, VA will more properly follow its own rules and regulations which should have protected these veterans all along. But between 2011 and March of 2015, VA staffers insured a 100% denial rate of claims which should have been approved. The veterans have paid for these failures at the VA, not the staffers who did this to us.

I've been privileged, and grateful, to be a VA patient since 1991 after I was injured in the line of duty. But had I not been eligible for VA care, as with C-123 veterans' whose claims for Agent Orange benefits are still denied here's just some of the care I received but would have been denied between 2011 and 2015:

Heart surgery, cataract surgery, two shoulder surgeries, two hip surgeries, infection control, wound clinic, colonoscopy, pharmacy, cancer care, specialty clinics, rehabilitation, prosthetics, counseling, nose surgery, throat surgery, wheelchairs, allowances to replace clothing damaged by my wheelchair, inhalation therapy/sleep studies and CPAP machine,  immunizations, dental surgery, independent living assistance, imaging, corrective footwear, glasses, hearing aids, VA home loan, monthly compensation, state tax benefits, automobile registration fee waiver, home health care, travel allowances, primary medical care, biopsies and other pathology/laboratory care, and more.

Without my other military injuries to qualify me for all this care, I'd be outside the VA hospital with my finger stuck to their door bell, trying to get in but their door still locked. I might have found vital care elsewhere, but at my own expense.

That's the situation still faced by my fellow C-123 veterans. Unlike me, blessed as I am by all the medical care I've had between 2011 and 2015, my friends are still denied all VA medical care because VA has that non-existent  "overwhelming preponderance of evidence," Fortunately it has been dismissed by the National Academy of Sciences, CDC, NIH, VA physicians, US Public Health Service and dozens of physicians and scientists, plus peer-reviewed scientific articles.

Legal scholars in Yales' Veterans Law Clinic examined the legal situation and affirmed the C-123 veterans' eligibility for presumptive service connection per VA rules and the 1991 Agent Orange Law.

Still, four years after submitting my own Agent Orange claim, it remains, like every other C-123 claim, ordered denied by VA's Compensation and Pension Service. Although the VA promises a "case by case evaluation," the fact is that promise only means a case by case denial of all such claims. So much for Due Process guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.

These next few weeks seem likely to bring at least some changes to VA's treatment of C-123 veterans' claims, blessings long overdue. VA provides compensation for service-related injuries and illnesses, and claims denied can be back-dated and often lost compensation eventually recovered.

What cannot be recovered, however, are the costs associated with medical care denied by VA and obtained by C-123 veterans during these four years. Worse, there can be no recovery of the medical care refused, care never received even outside the VA system, for want of coverage. I know I wouldn't be alive today without the care I've received for my Agent Orange-related illnesses from the VA, care provided not because I am an Agent Orange veteran but because I'm a Gulf War veteran.

That's fine for me even with my Agent Orange claim denied these last four years, but a disaster for my C-123 crewmates left untreated by the VA.

We're counting on VA making this mess right, thanks to senior leadership, the National Academy of Sciences, our legislators and dozens of scientists and physicians who so generously offered their expertise.

VFW National Commander Statement on C-123 Veterans to Joint Senate & House Veterans Affairs Committees

VFW's National Commander John Stroud issued a statement today before the Joint Senate & House Veterans Affairs Committees. The story was also reported in the Springfield Republican, with more local detail. 

Regardless, VA Under Secretary Allison Hickey announced to Stars and Stripes on 11 March 2015 the VA reconsideration of its initial plans to care for C-123 veterans.

"C-123 Veterans: 

During the Vietnam War, C-123 aircraft were utilized to spray toxic herbicides throughout Vietnam. After the Vietnam War, those same C-123 aircraft were repurposed and reassigned to Air Force Reserve units throughout the country, where they were used by Air Force reservists for training, military airlifts, and medical and cargo transportation, as well as mosquito abatement spraying.

Many of these veterans now suffer from many of the conditions that have been linked to exposure to Agent Orange. However, VA has vehemently opposed any notion that these veterans where exposed to enough Agent Orange during their duties aboard the previously exposed aircraft to cause adverse health effects.

In its recent report, “Post-Vietnam Dioxin Exposure in Agent Orange Contaminated C-123 Aircraft,” IOM estimated that up to 2,100 Air Force Reservists worked on C-123 aircraft that had been previously used to spray herbicides during the Vietnam War.

After diligently considering relevant evidence, available sample data, and the current body of work on the health effects associated with exposure to Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (TCDD), the Committee determined that Air Force Reservists who worked on previously exposed C-123 aircraft “were exposed (in the technical sense of the word of having bodily contact with the chemicals) to the components of [Agent Orange] to some extent.

VA has acknowledged that this IOM report contradicts its stance on whether C-123 veterans were exposed to enough TCDD to cause adverse health effects. In response to the IOM report, VA has established a workgroup to review IOM’s report and make recommendations.

On January 31, 2015, the VFW sent a letter to VA Secretary McDonald urging him to extend Agent Orange presumptive authority to the aircrews of these aircraft. The VFW will not accept any action short of granting C-123 veterans the care and benefits they deserve."

This includes amending VA regulations so veterans who served as pilots and aircrews on these contaminated aircraft receive equitable treatment when applying for VA disability compensation."

Proposal to Dissolve C-123 Veterans Association

The Last Bag Drag.
Time to file the voucher and head home.
Mission complete.

If things go through this week as VA has indicated, our reason for existence draws to a close. We told VA we'd been exposed to Agent Orange, and at long last the VA will begin treating our Agent Orange illnesses and providing the full range of care and benefits due us.

So there is nothing remaining that is unique to us. We've argued our case and won, and now the proposal for all to consider is simply dissolving our casual association, and inviting all members to affiliate with the Vietnam Veterans of America.

VVA is organized to meet our needs. Their service officers understand the VA and Agent Orange issues, and we share with VVA members the full range of veterans concerns. In particular, we have an abiding concern for veterans of all toxic exposures, something the VVA will fight for on our behalf and with our small number of airmen added to their ranks.

We'd thought of an aviation-focused chapter, but VVA's structure makes that impractical. Because we're spread all across the nation we can't enjoy the fellowship of other veterans unless allied with VVA and other service organizations such as VFW, DAV and the Legion.

Because of some continuing issues such as FOIA suits and Yale's representation of us on important cases, we will continue as an entity until these things are resolved. I'll also continue to blog as the mood strikes me...I've come to enjoy this as something of a focused journal

A note: of all the service organizations, while a couple like PVA and DAV mentioned us occasionally in their publications, our cause was championed by the VVA and the American Legion.

To both, we say "thank you, brothers."

Air Force Magazine Notes IOM C-123 Report in March Issue

In addition to veterans' letters about Agent Orange published in the March issue of Air Force Magazine, the publishers made note of the Institute of Medicine report on C-123 contaminated aircraft. IOM determined "with confidence"  that USAF Reserve aircrews and maintainers were exposed to Agent Orange in their post-Vietnam flying between 1972-1982.

Pittsburgh C-123 Vets – Agent Orange Exposures Sunday Front Page News

Three bases had C-123s: Westover, Rickenbacker and Pittsburgh with its 911th Tactical Airlift Group (now 911AW.)

Today, their Sunday Post-Gazette newspaper brought front-page new of their Agent Orange exposures and the VA's anticipated announcement within a week of approved disability benefits.

Congratulations, 911th aircrews, maintainers, aerial port, AME and life support! Congratulations, too, to VA for reaching out to us following January's Institute of Medicine C-123 exposure report, under consideration since then by Dr. Ralph Erickson's team within Veterans Health.

Retired Military? Agent Orange Exposure May Qualify You for Combat Related Special Compensation

Many things have changed regarding military retirements and VA disability compensation, and how they relate. Agent Orange is considered a "weapon of war" and thus may affect one's eligibility for "Combat Related Special Compensation."

VA disability compensation is tax-free, of course, and most military retirees pay tax on retirement pay. Military disability retirement is also taxed, unless the veteran entered service before 1978.

Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) is a program that was created for disability and non-disabled military retirees with combat-related disabilities. It is a tax free entitlement that replaces retired pay that was waived to receive VA disability compensation for combat related disabilities.

Eligibility. To qualify for CRSC you must:
• be entitled to and/or receiving military retired pay or be a reservist that is at least 60 years old or retired under Temporary Early Retirement Authorization (TERA) AND
• be rated at least 10 percent by the Department of Veteran’s Affairs AND
• waive your VA pay from your retired pay AND
• file a CRSC application with your branch of service

To learn more about this, visit HERE.

First News Report of C-123 Agent Orange Coverage Revealed by VA Secretary McDonald

Lewis Wallace published the first announcement of C-123 Agent Orange coverage in his Ohio-area WYSO report.

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs says it will make an announcement next week about treatment for Air Force reservists who may have been exposed to Agent Orange after Vietnam. Ohio U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown has joined the chorus of voices asking for a policy change.

As many as 2,100 people who worked on C-123 cargo planes in the Air Force reserves could have been exposed to Agent Orange residues in the 1970s, after those planes had been used in Vietnam to spray the toxic defoliant. The planes weren’t thoroughly cleaned before being reused in the reserves in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. One C-123 that was finally retired to the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force was decontaminated by contractors in the 1990s before going on display inside a hangar.

Rickenbacker Air Force Base in Columbus is one of the sites that flew C-123s for medical and other missions, and a growing group of former reservists has been asking the VA for recognition for health conditions that could be related to dioxin, the toxin in Agent Orange. Currently, anyone who was on the ground in Vietnam and has any of a list of diseases associated with dioxin is eligible for what are called presumptive benefits, including disability benefits and money for survivors. But many of the C-123 reservists never went to Vietnam, and almost all have had their claims related to Agent Orange denied by the VA.

Ohio Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown says he talked to VA Secretary McDonald about the issue personally.

“How do we make this up to them in the quickest, best possible way?” he said in an interview with WYSO.

In a Veterans Affairs committee meeting Thursday morning, McDonald for the first time publicly promised answers following a question from Senator Brown that referenced WYSO’s national reporting on the issue. The statement came after years of pressure from reservists, who say the VA had the information it needed years ago to reassess the status of C-123 vets.

After a recent report by the Institute of Medicine confirmed the possibility that C-123 reservists were exposed to Agent Orange in hazardous amounts, the VA updated its website encouraging vets to file claims. Still, veterans involved in advocacy have been pushing for the VA and the Air Force to be proactive about finding the people who could be affected, and offering them the same presumptive benefits given to those who were in Vietnam.

McDonald said the VA is working to identify the people who could have been exposed, and Under Secretary for Benefits Allison Hickey will make an announcement on the issue next week.

C-123 Veterans! Secretary McDonald Stated This AM that VA Would Announce Next Week!

Thank you, Mr. Secretary!

Under Secretary Hickey will announce the VA coverage next week. Secretary McDonald answered an inquiry from Ohio's Senator Brown with the promise that Secretary Hickey would do the honors, wrapping up our four year struggle getting to this point.

We owe everything to the kindness of the media, legislators, scientists and other veterans. Thank you!

American Legion Magazine Reports on C-123 Agent Orange Saga

The American Legion was the first service organization to stand with us in advocating Agent Orange benefits for our exposed C-123 veterans. Introduced to us by Columbia's Dr. Jeanne Stellman, Legion executives presented and the membership approved a resolution calling on the VA to recognize our toxin exposures.

Support from America's largest veterans organization is something that certainly got attention and respect from the Air Force and VA.

Continuing their focus on our C-123 issue, this month's Legion magazine carries an article by author Tom Philpott on page 19. Like the American Legion, Philpott is very familiar with C-123 issues, having begun his coverage of us in 2011 when we began our efforts. His coverage of the January 9 2015 report from the Institute of Medicine was very comprehensive, and carried through Gannett's chain.

Philpott has been covering military issues longer than most veterans served...over thirty years as a journalist, including his tour in the Coast Guard.

This month, he surprised us with his full page report in the Legion: we had no idea it was in the works. He certainly surprised me with his kind words, which are much appreciated as we anticipate wrapping up these four years of arduous work.

I believe the next report from Tom Philpott will announce (to use a naval metaphor) a terrific "sea change" in the way VA has evaluated our disability claims. That will be my favorite Philpott article ever! I can't wait!

Little-Known Benefits From a VA Disability Rating

Our focus, of course, is always on establishing our eligibility for VA medical care: No medical care means terrific suffering and financial hardship for veterans unfairly denied earned care.

For 100% disabled veterans, VA's embrace is wonderful. Ophthalmology, audiology, counseling, rehab, dental, prosthetics, pharmacy, specialty clinics, general medicine...a wide range of vital services to help a disabled veteran recover, or improve as much as possible seeking the greatest quality of life possible.

And, of course, there is compensation. It is called that because of the philosophy of replacing, with some financial adjustment, the veteran's lost earning capacity. It is not a pension, it is not charity, it is not taking something more properly due another deserving veteran...it is earned by each veteran with a recognized service-connected illness or injury. There is no means test, of course: that's something required for a pension, but not service-connected compensation.

But there is more that veterans should be aware of (but I'm no expert...check with the VA for details!)

• State benefits, typically property tax relief, veterans bonuses, automobile licenses and waived auto fees, state veterans' homes, cemetaries, college tuition waiver, children's college tuition waiver
• Veterans Cemetery Administration. Burial in a national cemetery, state veterans cemetery. Burial allowances for service-connected deaths
• Priority One for VA medical care, with no co--pays
• Educational benefits for children; continued medical care for children disabled before age 18
• Transportation costs for medical care beyond a certain distance from a veteran's home
• Contract medical care in the community
• Long-term health care (this gets tricky...VA needs to explain if you're interested) in VA facilities or contracted local facilities; VA assistance with state nursing homes which charge fees
• One year of fee-waived VGLI (must be applied for) 

• Clothing allowance for clothing damaged by medicines, prosthetics, wheelchairs, etc.

• Independent living assistance, sometimes including home modifications, quality of life issues
• Access to VA's War Injury and Illness Treatment Centers
• Combat Related Special Compensation. Adjusts taxes on military retirement, in some cases to zero, because Agent Orange is a "weapon of war"

• Some commercial firms, like Lowes and Home Depot, offer discounts 

• Survivor's benefits, including CHAMP-VA