Update on VA use of AFSC codes for C-123 service:
I argued with VA recently about their poor quality collection of eligible AFSCs for establishing C-123 service, and they apparently now will accept an AFSC on their list as well as a specific description of duties involving C-123 contact. They are covering aircrews, maintainers, AME and others. Most importantly, I believe this should help Aerial Port personnel apply and succeed with Agent Orange claims. Let me know.
WTC
Their letters to/from me:
Sir,
Hello, Dr. Erickson spoke very highly of you and so it was nice to see your email.
BVA actions are a legal review process over which I have no jurisdiction, but I am happy to forward your email and the attachment to VBA and the office that handles Agent Orange related actions.
I will ask that they review the unit name change from 33rd AES (Pittsburgh) to the 911th and the occupational codes. I will also make them aware that Mr. Dominic Baldini at JSRRC is available to address questions as necessary.
Thank you
Pat
V/R
Dr. xxx
Chief Consultant, Post-Deployment Health Services (10P4Q)
Patient Care Services, 810 Vermont Ave NW, Washington, DC 20420
O: 202-xxx-xxxx
VA Motto: ICARE [Integrity-Commitment-
From: Wes Carter <
Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2020 9:14 AM
To: Hxxxa R.
Cc: xxxDomenic A CIV USARMY HQDA OAA AHS (US) <
Subject: [EXTERNAL] CONTINUED DIFFICULTIES RE: C-123 AFSC AND UNITS
Dear Dr. Hxxx,
Please forgive another intrusion on an issue involving C-123 veterans. We continue to have BVA claims denied on the basis of veterans having AFSCs not listed, or units not listed, or units which are the same organization but have changed names.
In on case most troubling to me, a widow's 2008 claim continues being denied by VBA and BVA. Her husband's AFSC 90250 (medical technician) is for aeromedical evacuation technician but isn't on the various lists, at least not those used by BVA to deny claims. Her husband's C-123 aeromedical evacuation squadron was the 33rd AES at Pittsburgh, now changed names to the 911th as shown on VA lists but her claim was denied by BVA disregarding that detail.
Once BVA has successfully denied a claim the veteran or survivor is lost unless able to afford an attorney and this woman, living on Social Security, is not so fortunate.
Five years ago C-123 veterans won Agent Orange benefits. Four years ago I provided expert details to support her claim, and last year her claim was successfully opposed by BVA citing the AFSC and unit name.
I realize this is but one claim but it is a person, one of our veteran's widows and thus particularly important to every Air Force veteran. Please do what you can to invite Mr. Dominic Baldini at JSRRC to update VA on the basis of Air Force documents I've provided him, and do what you can to update BVA on the injustice they do blocking worthwhile claims.
Here is the BVA language used to prevent a claim's approval. Even though the text mentions medical crew members, the claim is denied because no listing of medical crew AFSCs is shown. Fortunately, some BVA judges are less concerned with using the issue for preventing approvals and realize the problem, thus permitting flight nurses, flight surgeons and aeromedical evacuation technicians' claims to be considered even though not one of their AFSCs is listed.
VA has published a list of military units who had regular and repeated exposure to contaminated Operation Ranch Hand C-123s, used to spray Agent Orange in Vietnam, as flight, maintenance, or medical crew members. VA has also published a list of specialty codes for military personnel who had regular and repeated exposure to contaminated Operation Ranch Hand C-123s, used to spray Agent Orange in Vietnam, as flight, maintenance, or medical crew members. Those codes for enlisted personnel are flight engineer/aircraft loadmaster (1130-1149), aircrew life support specialist (1220-1229), and aircraft maintenance specialist/flight technicians (4313-4359). Id.
Thus, to warrant presumptive exposure based on contact with a C-123, a Veteran must have been stationed at one of the identified bases during the specified time period with one of the listed units. The Veteran must also have a military occupational specialty that entailed that he regularly and repeatedly operated, maintained or served onboard C-123 aircraft.
And from another BVA decision:
Can you please bring this to the attention of VA folks able to correct the injustice being done these claimants?
Thank you,
--
Wes Carter