C-123 Vets Renew AF Public Affairs Complaint First Submitted - but ignored - in 2011

Last week leaders of the C-123 Veterans Association renewed our 2011 complaints about Air Force Public Affairs operations at Hill AFB UT and Davis-Monthan AFB AZ. We alleged Air Force deceptions, both by commission and omission, regarding the April-June 2010 destruction of the toxic C-123 fleet stored at Davis-Monthan.

Stored at Davis-Monthan's Boneyard since 1982 and in special HAZMAT quarantine for a decade by orders of the USAF Surgeon General, the airplanes were all quietly shredded and smelted in response to their Agent Orange contamination. The press release, however, did not cover that fact. The press release did not mention Agent Orange at all.

And in fact, the well-crafted press release was never released. A whole fleet of airplanes with a unique 40-year history, considered by many the embarrassment of the Air Force, disappeared and the media took no notice.

They were not meant to. Air Force Public Affairs word-smithed their press release to make it as innocuous as possible, then placed in a desk drawer in case some inquiring reporter raised a question. Base officials and their outside consultant had word-smithed out attention-grabbing words such as "Agent Orange, toxin, TCDD" and other accurate descriptions of the event. Officials also wrote about their concern that, unless the event were kept "below the radar," exposed veterans could apply to Veterans Affairs for treatment of Agent Orange illnesses.

The very mention of this concern...expressed by the consultant, base officials and those up the chain of command...is inappropriate. Instead, the Air Force should have been accurate in its communication with the public, and with the veterans who'd served faithfully but had been exposed to Agent Orange. There is no excuse for such a coverup...no wonder the Air Force fought Freedom of Information Act requests about this for three years, finally releasing mostly redacted white pages, devoid of content.

No questions were raised by local media because they Air Force took pains to insure nobody knew. If somebody found out, a deceptive press release was ready to give them, but no inquiries ever came.

A parallel would be if an aircraft crashed on base and PA typed out a press release saying there'd been an unscheduled mass casualty exercise followed by a test of the unit's voluntary blood donation program, after which the base returned to normal operations. And then put the press release into a drawer in case some newsperson noticed a plume of smoke rising from the base and one less airplane.

This whole scheme abused the First Amendment right of reporters in the area by denying them information about a significant military activity. It abused the duty those reporters had to the public by keeping from their readers information about the conduct of the American military and its expenditure of treasure and peoples' lives. The lives spoken of are ours...the veterans who flew these airplanes, and from whom information was kept from us by deceptions of Air Force Public Affairs at Hill and D-M, which was in violation of Air Force and DOD operating instructions, and also in violation of Air Force ethics and the ethics expected of professional...not marketing communications...public agency public affairs operations.

Lies? Not directly.

Prevarication? Absolutely! In the Air Force, a prevarication is a lie.

Impact? Information about our health kept from us for over a year and the evolution of disability claims with VA delayed for four.

Media and the public which depends on them to be informed about our government? Neither can trust USAF Public Affairs with this as an example of deception possible from military officials. And the veterans affected also have a loss of trust and confidence in our Air Force, knowing it willingly deceives us in issues involving our health to prevent our claims with the VA.

Inspector General Scolds VA VHA for Deceiving Congress & Veterans on Fact Sheet

More scandal added to VA's Year of Scandals. Here...a deliberate deception of the House Veterans Affairs Committee as confirmed by VA's own Inspector General today, and reported in USA Today and other journals. (note: see related C-123 post.) Secretary McDonald personally apologized, stating, "VA has a responsibility to communicate clearly and accurately to Congress, veterans and the American public."

OIG evaluated Veterans Health Administration’s (VHA’s) review of “unresolved” consults and the accuracy of VA’s summary, the National Consult Delay Review Fact Sheet (Fact Sheet), as requested by the Chairman of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee (HVAC).

Unresolved consults are requests for consultations that are open or active in patients’ electronic health records. In September 2012, VHA initiated a multi-phased review of consults that were unresolved for more than 90 days. By May 2014, the number of unresolved consults had decreased considerably.

However, because VHA did not implement appropriate controls, we found it lacks reasonable assurance that facilities appropriately reviewed and resolved consults; closed consults only after ensuring veterans had received the requested services, when appropriate; and, where consult delays contributed to patient harm, notified patients as required by VHA policy. Our review of the Fact Sheet found several key statements related to the scope and results of VHA’s review of unresolved consults were misleading or incorrect.

These statements were repeated by VHA leaders at meetings with congressional staff and during media events. In July 2014, VHA issued a letter to the Chairman of the HVAC that included information intended to clarify statements in the Fact Sheet.

We recommended that the Interim Under Secretary for Health (1) conduct a systematic assessment of the processes each VA medical facility used to address unresolved consults during VHA's system-wide consult review; (2) ensure that if a medical facility's processes are found to have been inconsistent with VHA guidance on addressing unresolved consults, action is taken to confirm that patients have received appropriate care; and (3) after reviewing the circumstances of any inappropriate resolution of consults, confer with the Office of Human Resources and the Office of General Counsel or other relevant agency to determine the appropriate administrative action to take, if any.

VA Public Affairs – Easiest Job in the Department of Veterans Affairs?"

For the 54 folks staffing Washington DC's VA Public Affairs office, nothing could be easier, even during the 2014 Year of Scandals. Or as Queen Elizabeth put it in 1992 regarding her childrens' divorce troubles and her castle fire, Annus Horribilis.  A VA Annus Horribilis.

Still, just show up for work, write well, have a genuinely nice attitude and good attention to detail. And don't say much about anything worrying the public. or sharing with them the details needed for citizens to monitor and challenge their government's care of veterans.

We do see a better, more responsive attitude and outreach effort on the part of our regional and local public affairs representatives, especialy ours here in Cheyenne. But our problem is at the national level where VA has an information vacuum.  Public Affairs is determined to maintain that vacuum. Except for self-congratulatory press releases.

Job #1: protect the boss and protect the Department. Requirement to inform the public about the full conduct of government: Zero.

And pump out those very empty zero-content responses to nearly every inquiry from the national media, the legislative representatives and veterans themselves. Pick one, use several or use them all in a response...and they provide absolutely zero content. The reporter could have picked the line for the VA to use, fully expecting one of the vapid examples below.

The House Veterans Affairs Committee complained that such protective or non-responsive replies are “blocking the public from having an independent view of important functions of the executive branch of government,”

The Washington Examiner covered this no-value-added in March 2014, featuring the House Committee on Veterans Affairs "VA Honesty Project."

We've read them for years. Our eyes glaze over at their meaningless content-free blurbs:

• "We take these issues very seriously."

• "We want to ensure veterans receive all the benefits they're entitled to."

• "We will look into that and let you know."

• "We remain committed to quality veteran medical care."

• "VA is carefully reviewing the issue."

• "VA will continue to provide safe, effective, high-quality health care to the men and women we have the honor and privilege to serve every day."

• "No comment."

* Or simply, no response at all. Every senator or congressman has dozens of inquiries ignored by VA

From The Blaze: 

    “They tried to misdirect Congress and the American people away from the facts,” House Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Jeff Miller (R-Fla.) told the Tampa Bay Times. “I think they got caught and now they are trying to modify their story…. The misdirection was, in fact, designed in Washington.”
    According to the Tampa Bay Times article, VA spokeswoman Gina Jackson said: “Is this really the most important question that you have that you want to address? Because it just seems to me it is a misunderstanding of the way the fact sheet is labeled. Am I missing something here?”
    But according to the House Committee on Veterans Affairs, there are plenty more questions that need to be answered. According to its website, there are 117 outstanding requests for information from the VA – many predating even the revelations about the waiting list scandal. Of those, 66 information requests are since 2012."

VA Public Information & Science Reporting Standard

“VA will ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information it disseminates to the public."

(unless they need to deceive)

USAF CHEATS on C-123 Freedom of Information Act Request

Today a CD with about 500 mg of test reports and other materials was received in response

to our 1 August 2012 FOIA submitted to the USAF Surgeon General and the USAF School of Aerospace Medicine, part of the Air Force Material Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio. The basic subject was the 2012 USAF Consultatative Letter dealing with post-Vietnam C-123 contamination and veteran exposure.

Requested those ten and a half months ago were public documents, already gathered in one place as per the orders given the AFMC earlier, so finding everything shouldn't have proved difficult.

(Click for Video on this Subject) What does seem to be difficult was letting go of the information, despite the force of law in the FOIA. Over six weeks were required for the AFMC Judge Advocate General attorneys to select what few items they'd approve for release. A single sheet of paper was all that C-123 veterans were permitted to get, and that was simply a note from one office at Wright-Pat to a JAG at Davis-Monthan asking for some copies of old records.

What did the AF keep from the public? They failed to release the following items listed in the FOIA, which itself was earlier approved without exception, other than for irrelevant personal information such as telephone numbers and names of junior personnel:

-marginal notations ==kept secret

-interim and final reports==kept secret

-emails===kept secret

-tapes or other recordings===kept secret

-correspondence==kept secret except for a single page letter===kept secret

-other official documents, many of which we first provided USAFSAM===kept secret

The FOIA response didn't even include the report itself, nor the instructions to the team, nor their work product...nothing at all. The materials were vital to help us challenge the various mistakes the AF made in concluding that our decade flying the toxic, Agent Orange-contaminated C-123 left us somehow unexposed. We veterans believe, especially considering the expert input we've received from other federal agencies confirming our dioxin exposure, that USAFSAM must have had command interference to reach any alternate position.The AF Consultative Letter is cited by the VA in their over-eager rejection of all C-123 veterans claims, and we needed this to better challenge the mistakes in it. But... KEPT SECRET for reasons that must be VERY important at WPAFB and the USAF Surgeon General!

This reeks! What in the heck is going on, with the VA responding in a similar manner stating that, although the VA had conducted a "thorough scientific review" no materials existed within VA regarding that thorough scientific review of the C-123 -- yet the VA has enough materials somewhere to permit them to deny veterans benefits! And now the AF doing much the same, releasing only older papers which generally address Agent Orange issues from the beginning of the Vietnam War until around the late 1990's. Absolutely nothing except a single page addressing the Consultative Letter and how it came to be so anti-veteran! 

Truly, this reeks! Something very unusual is going on to force otherwise responsible Air Force civilians and military personnel to disregard laws like the FOIA! 

HEY, VA and USAF: We veterans have a RIGHT, claimed here under the FOIA regardless of your preference to such hide such things (FOIA be damned, right?? Ain't no stinkin' law gonna bother you, right??) and thus to know the foundation of your schemes to turn us away from the doors of our VA hospitals as we seek Agent Orange medical care!

Anybody remember in some high school civics class long, long ago when we were fed the line about the people being sovereign, not the government? Anybody remember "support and defend the Constitution" in our oaths?