"Maude DeVictor, Continuing Her Crusade to Expose Agent Orange" - Washington Post, November 1986

Heros come in all shapes, all sizes, wherever they are needed. Vietnam Veterans needed Maude DeVictor
and she was there for us. Our hero, Navy veteran Ms. Maude DeVictor.

(First Published November 9, 1986)\

By Desson Howee

She welcomes you into her hotel room like a distracted hostess -- glad to see you but worried about the pot roast.

"I'm looking ragged and battered and pudgy," she says. She asks you to cool your heels a bit, while she adjusts. Her garment bag lies unopened on the bed. Mister Rogers is welcoming everyone to his neighborhood loudly on the unwatched television and the phone rings constantly with calls from the press.

This is an elated Maude DeVictor. The woman known for her advocacy for Vietnam veterans -- particularly over the issue of Agent Orange -- has just jetted in from Boston, where she was received by Mayor Raymond Flynn and Gov. Michael Dukakis (Flynn declared today Maude DeVictor Day). This past weekend in Washington she attended "In Service to America," a conference sponsored by the Vietnam Veterans of America.

DeVictor's frenetic activity is connected with tonight's "Unnatural Causes," a controversial NBC television drama based on her battle to establish a connection between the defoliant Agent Orange used in the war and a plethora of deaths, illnesses and physical ailments that many Vietnam veterans have suffered. A consultant on the film, she says the docudrama "accurately depicts" the circumstances of her career with the Veterans Administration's Chicago Regional Office.

"Just do the top," she says to a photographer. She points to her hips and laughs.

"Have you heard of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo?" she asks, referring to a Buddhist chant. She throws a visitor a leaflet on Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism before heading for the bathroom with a lipstick.

"This is like a victory for fat people," she says just before disappearing and lets out a cackle that threatens to vibrate the infrastructure.

When DeVictor, a benefits counselor at the VA office, filed a claim in 1977 on behalf of a Vietnam veteran who had terminal cancer, it was the beginning of what may be a lifelong mission. The veteran's widow claimed his death resulted from exposure to Agent Orange, and DeVictor -- a divorced mother raising a son -- began to discover other veterans who also believed their medical problems came from the toxin.

The Origins of the Agent Orange Act of 1991

On February 6, 1991, President George H. W. Bush signed the Agent Orange Act of 1991. This act was the first piece of legislation to officially establish a group of presumptive conditions for Vietnam Veterans exposed to herbicides, meaning that Veterans with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, soft tissue sarcomas, and chloracne could now receive medical benefits from the Veterans Administration (VA) as a result of their service in Vietnam. 

This legislation was applauded by Veterans groups, government officials, and the general public. Yet, it was rooted in over a decade of fierce debate, VA institutional resistance, and confusion over the long-term health effects of Agent Orange and dioxin exposure.

Agent Orange was the most common of the so-called Rainbow Herbicides used during Operation Ranch Hand in the Vietnam War. It was made up of a 50:50 mixture of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T, the latter of which contained a contaminant known as TCDD, a type of dioxin or organic pollutant. The herbicide was remarkably effective at clearing jungle foliage and depriving Viet Cong forces of both cover and workable farmland. Operation Ranch Hand lasted from 1962 until 1971. 

By the time the Air Force ceased these herbicide spraying missions, Agent Orange alone accounted for 11.22 million of the over 18 million gallons of herbicide sprayed in Southeast Asia. Many Veterans still recall being sprayed with Agent Orange but were instead "treated" with malathion, sprayed from C-123 Tail Number 362 for insect control. Planes spraying for insect control had the green paint removed as the malathion would foul the surfaces.

By the late 1970s, the public was seriously questioning the health effects of dioxin exposure. Many Veterans claimed (and VA totally denied) Agent Orange or other herbicides were behind their chronic fatigue, vision loss, numbness, cancer, birth defects in their children, and a myriad of other health concerns. VA began receiving medical claims from Veterans alleging dioxin exposure at least as early as 1977, but, as media coverage on the issue grew, so did the number of claims. At the time, only chloracne, a rare skin condition, had been scientifically linked to dioxin exposure. If Veterans claimed that contact with herbicides was the cause for any other illnesses, VA ultimately denied all their medical claims "due to the lack of scientific evidence."

However, VA did take some baby steps to address the issue, mostly because of Veteran pressure, some press coverage, and a determined Veteran's advocate named Maude DeVictor. In 1978, VA established an internal Agent Orange Registry and began conducting in-depth medical examinations for Veterans claiming they were exposed to Agent Orange. They also assigned “environmental health physicians” at each of their medical centers who were specifically tasked with gathering information related to chemical exposures. In 1979, they established the VA Advisory Committee on Health-Related Effects of Herbicides, and in the early 1980s, they also created the Agent Orange Projects Office, the Chloracne Task Force, the Data Analysis Task Force, and the Agent Orange Research and Education Office, each of which were tasked with studying various aspects of Agent Orange exposure among Veterans.

Under Congressional pressure, VA also launched multiple weak-kneed outreach efforts related to dioxin exposure. The Agent Orange Bulletin was launched in December 1980 and provided updates on Agent Orange activities for VA medical center staff. For Veterans themselves, VA released a 30-minute videotape titled Agent Orange: A Search for Answers, as well as pamphlet titled “Worried About Agent Orange?” which was distributed to all Veterans during their Agent Orange medical examinations. Both the videotape and pamphlet emphasized the fact that chloracne remained the only known medical condition directly attributable to herbicide exposure. 

In November 1982, VA also introduced the Agent Orange Review, a recurring newsletter meant to keep Veterans up to date on the latest developments on Agent Orange research and policies. Even so, official VA policy still called for physicians in VA medical centers to refrain from prematurely attributing a Veteran’s ill-health to Agent Orange exposure until more concrete evidence proving association became available: VA physicians were prohibited from offering opinions on Agent Orange-suspected illnesses.

Multiple agencies, including VA, began publishing the results of dioxin-related studies throughout the 1980s. Most of these initial studies maintained that there was no link between dioxin exposure and long-term health problems, although it was difficult to prove which had Veterans had been exposed while in the service. In 1990, however, studies by the CDC and VA’s Advisory Committee on Health-Related Effects of Herbicides determined that non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and soft tissue sarcomas among Vietnam Veterans were “at least as likely as not” connected to herbicide exposure. 

VA’s secretary at the time, Edward J. Derwinski, was especially invested in the Agent Orange issue. The day after each of these studies were released, he classified each respective illness as service-connected for Vietnam Veterans. These classifications officially became law with the Agent Orange Act of 1991.

Upon the passage of the bill, Derwinski noted that “VA has [always had] one overriding goal in this area: providing, as best we can, the truth for our Vietnam Veterans about the effects of exposure to Agent Orange. Because, in our opinion, that is the goal of this fine legislation, we are pleased to offer our support.” Derwinki’s “open mind” on the Agent Orange debate was lauded by the public and members of Congress alike. Representative Thomas Daschle, who had previously been critical of VA efforts concerning herbicide exposure, commented that Derwinki’s “willingness to listen to Veterans, to reexamine the scientific evidence, and to give Veterans the benefit of the doubt has been crucial to the effort to redefine the federal government’s response to the Agent Orange problem.”

Still, neither Derwinki nor the VA moved on Agent Orange benefits until Congress shoved the 1991 Agent Orange Act down the VA's throat.

While many of the questions surrounding Agent Orange remained, the Agent Orange Act of 1991 was a turning point in providing Vietnam Veterans with needed care, and over the following decades, VA classified over a dozen additional conditions as presumptive for Veterans who were exposed to herbicides.

Westover C-123 Nearly Brings Down the President!

 Old Warbirds: What Fascinating Stories They Tell

By Wes Carter, 74AES,1974-1992

FORWARD:  

In an earlier article I suggested this essay would present a true story. I said I’d somehow weave together an Air Force C-123 airplane I once crewed, Doan's Headache Pills, Tom Cruise, Ayatollah Khomeini, “The Fat Man and the Fat Lady,” Richard Nixon and Watergate, FBI, José Fernando Canales Aleman, CIA, a USAF 439th TAW Honduran beach bar with wings, Ms. Fawn Hall’s September 2025 wedding, Dennis Hopper, Pablo Escobar and lots of cocaine and money.

Plus, for extra credit, Ronald Reagan and jelly beans. “Now there you go again.” If you wish, simply

return to this paragraph to check off players, events and other items as the story evolves. All this = one story. And true!

I freely admit this is a long and detailed read, but it happened with terrible consequences. I guess I like to hear myself type almost as much as hear myself talk, however I'll try to keep this short enough my printer won't choke on it.

Things like this shouldn't have happened but seem to bite us sharply in our national politics again and again. Maybe our poetical parties need an ethics and morality device, kind of like Spock’s Star Trek tricorder. That would be so cool!

Everything began to unravel on October 5, 1986, when a Nicaraguan soldier downed an American plane carrying arms to “Contra” guerrillas, exposing a tightly held U.S. clandestine program. A month later, reports surfaced that Washington had been covertly selling arms to Iran (our sworn enemy and a state sponsor of terrorism), in exchange for help freeing hostages in Beirut. The profits, it turned out, were going to support the Contras, despite an explicit ban by Congress.

In the firestorm that erupted, shocking details emerged, raising the prospect of impeachment, and the American public confronted a scandal as momentous as it was confusing. At its center was President Ronald Reagan amid a swirl of questions about illegal wars, consorting with terrorists, and the abuse of presidential power.

DATE AND SETTING: Western Hemisphere, 1982-1988

Chapter One, Ronald Reagan: (continued below)

"Now there you go again." President Reagan's mild censure of his White House press corps gave every reporter in the briefing room fits of frustration at his evasiveness and those smiles that the Old Man does so effectively.

Bubba's First Day as USAF MSC Officer?

 

C-123 Aircraft Agent Orange Exposure –disability medical care and compensation

Our C-123 Agent Orange effort began at Westover in 2010 and has now impacted over 30 other Active Duty and Reserve Units, and thousands of veterans! Thus far, veterans and their families have received over $80 million in medical care, disability compensation, and survivor benefits.
If you had regular contact with C-123 aircraft while serving as an active-duty service member or Reservist, or are the survivor of such a veteran, you may be eligible for VA disability or other compensation. Call the VA today!
Active-duty units

Unit	Base location	Service dates
1st Special Operations Wing (SOW)	Hurlburt Auxiliary Field, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida	1970 to 1973
24th Special Operations Wing (SOW)	Howard Air Force Base, Panama	1970 to 1973
51st Air Base Wing (ABW)	Osan Air Base, South Korea	1970 to 1973
56th Air Base Wing (ABW)	Luke Air Force Base, Arizona	1970 to 1973
309th Special Operations Squadron (SOS)	Tainan Air Field, Taiwan	1969 to 1970
310th Special Operations Squadron (SOS)	Tainan Air Field, Taiwan	1969 to 1970
405th Fighter Wing (FW)	Clark Air Force Base, Philippines	1969 to 1970
4410th Combat Crew Tactical Wing (CCTW)	Hurlburt Auxiliary Field, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida	1970 to 1973
4500th Air Base Wing (ABW)	Langley Air Force Base, Virginia	1962 to 1963, 1970 to 1973

Reserve units

Unit	Base location	Service dates
74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron (AES)	Westover Air Force Base and Hanscom Field, Massachusetts	1972 to 1982
355th Tactical Airlift Squadron (TAS)	Lockbourne/Rickenbacker Air Force Base, Ohio	1969 to 1986
356th Tactical Airlift Squadron (TAS)	Lockbourne/Rickenbacker Air Force Base, Ohio	1969 to 1986
731st Tactical Airlift Squadron (TAS)	Westover Air Force Base and Hanscom Field, Massachusetts	1972 to 1982
758th Airlift Squadron (AS)	Pittsburgh International Airport, Pennsylvania	1972 to 1982
901st Organizational Maintenance Squadron (OMS)	Westover Air Force Base and Hanscom Field, Massachusetts	1972 to 1982
911th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron (AES)	Pittsburgh International Airport, Pennsylvania	1972 to 1982
911th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron (AMS)	Pittsburgh International Airport, Pennsylvania	1972 to 1982
4413th Combat Crew Tactical Wing (CCTW)	Lockbourne/Rickenbacker Air Force Base, Ohio	1969 to 1986

LTCOL Joan Hartnett, former commander 74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, has passed on.

 Joan T. Hartnett died on Thursday May 29th at the Sunrise of Lynnfield following a lengthy illness. She'd recently celebrated her 93rd birthday. 

Joan was born in Revere on May 13, 1932, to her parents John and Mary Hartnett. She, along with her sister Mary, were raised and educated in Revere. She was an alumna of Revere High School, Class of 1950. Joan then pursued her passion of becoming a nurse by enrolling in the Cheslea Memorial Hospital Nursing School. 

After she completed her studies, she began her career at Albert Einstein Medical Center. From there, she went on to work for Malden Hospital and Boston City Hospital. In the meantime, she enlisted in the United States Air Force Reserves in 1967 and became a Chief Flight Nurse. Her career in the military spanned 25 years. During her time in the Air Force, Joan traveled all over the country and the world.

She was honorably discharged and retired as Lieutenant Colonel in 1992. Joan returned home too and continued her work as a nurse in Boston City Hospital. Joan loved being a nurse and did her job with the fullest measure of excellence. 

She was also very devoted to her family, especially her sister Mary. In later years, Joan happily shared her time in Revere, Maine and Florida. Joan was a very humble woman, who was devoted to her country, family and her passion of being a nurse.

She is the beloved daughter of the late John T. Hartnett and Mary I. (Turner) Hartnett. The loving sister of the late Mary Cassani and her husband John A. Cassani. Also lovingly survived by many cousins, both living and deceased. In lieu of flowers donations may be made in Joan’s memory to the Mass General Brigham / Mass General development Office, 

As one of her Medical Service Corps officers, I count it as wonderful memories the many times Joanie gave out with a frightening "CARTER COOL YOUR JETS!" admonition.

Pentagon Study To Help Flight Crew and Aviation Ground Support Veterans' Cancer Claims

So, what’s this all about?

About YOU as a veteran, and perhaps also you as a veteran with cancers the Pentagon has identified as somehow related to aviation. We’re addressing active duty as well as Reserve Component servicemembers.

A 2024 Pentagon study identified several cancers as being significantly higher among aircrews and aviation ground support than in a similar non-flying population: What’s greater? 87% melanoma, thyroid cancer 37%, and breast cancer and prostate cancer both 16% greater. The study is attached for your review.

We’re veterans of the 74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, Westover ARB, MA. Our history includes flying the infamous former Agent Orange spray airplanes, the C-123 Provider. Our planes remained contaminated with dioxin. It took many years of fighting until in 2015 VA finally conceded our exposures. Our veterans (plus many other bases and units- see attached lists)) are now presumed by VA as having been exposed and our claims for the various Agent Orange ailments are finally being honored. So much so, in fact, that over $80 million in medical care, compensation and survivor Agent Orange benefits have been won for C-123 veterans.

However, Agent Orange is now pretty much in the “rear view mirror.” Our concern shifts to you if you were in some way associated with military aviation and now suffer one of these cancers. We want to help you understand the importance of the Pentagon study and its value to a VA claim – and the great value to your physician who we hope will cite the study as persuasive in a nexus opinion supporting your VA claim for what VA terms "direct service connection."

VA has typically denied Reserve Component exposure claims (except ours) insisting Reservists weren’t on active duty when exposed: no active duty = no benefits. They also insisted active duty veterans experiencing these cancers only many years after service weren’t injured with exposures and their claims were also denied.

The Pentagon study is our solution. It established that something associated with aviation is causing significantly greater risk of cancers, with worrisome percentages cited above. Now Reservists can claim an exposure injury and have the study (and their physician’s letter citing the study) as strong supporting proof. An exposure injury makes a Reservist a veteran per VA regulations. The same with active duty – if you flew, the study gives a link between flying/maintaining and the cancers. Being a Department of Defense report, the VA finds it damn hard to dispute, particularly because they contributed to it!

There are four claim packets in our Pentagon report. For each named cancer, we’ve writing a brief introduction, discussed the VA Form 526EZ disability claim form, the VA physical exam form for each specific cancer, and a VA Form 21-10210 statement of support. The 21-10210 explains to the VA claims agent why the Pentagon report constitutes powerful evidence supporting your claim. In fact, other veterans have already won claims and appeals by citing the report – it works! Share it with your VSO!

Here are individual claims packets:

Melanoma

Breast Cancer

Thyroid Cancer

Prostate Cancer

Good luck with your claim and let us know how you did.

Wes Carter, 74AES, C-123 Veterans Association.  

rustysilverwings@gmail.com

c123kcancer.blogspot.com

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD: Claims packets for flight crews and aviation ground support veterans: Melanoma, thyroid cancer, breast cancer and prostate cancer. All four are in one file to simplify distribution. Each has an intro, info about VA Form 526EZ to initiate a claim, a cancer-specific VA veterans benefit questionnaire" for a physical exam, and a VA statement form with an explanation about the Pentagon study's importance to aviation-related disability claims.

Here is information on the Pentagon study.

Here's the Vietnam Veterans of American excellent claims guide, although it focus on Agent Orange issues rather than aviation-related illnesses.

Peaceful passing of Colonel Mary Coyle, USAF NC, Retired

 
A sad flurry of emails among former members of the 74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, Westover AFB, MA. We're learning of the deaths of USAF Colonel Mary Coyle and her husband, U.S. Marine Corps Colonel Edward Coyle.

Col. Mary Coyle and her beloved husband, long time residents of Milton, MA passed away peacefully on 10 July and 30 July, respectively.

Mary was born in Boston and was an RN at Carney Hospital. A devout Catholic she lived her life faith as she volunteered with the homeless and other charitable activities. 

Col Coyle was a Flight Nurse Examiner and later the Commander, 74th Aeronautical Evacuation Squadron, Westover AFB, MA. She was a dedicated officer and a kind, skilled nurse. She trained and mentored many, many, young Flight Nurses and Medical Technicians (and Medical Service Corps officers!) and carefully prepared them for their combat medical roles. 

Col. Coyle’s husband Ed was born in Dighton, MA. He was a U.S.Marine Corps Colonel who served with distinction. He was the recipient of the Purple Heart for injuries suffered in Viet Nam. 

Mary was the model of an officer, a gentlewoman and a nurse. Also, a model of a commander I was blessed to know. Unnecessary details aside, she spent a few lunch hours with me down in the Boston MBTA, talking about careers and she quite literally changed several decades of my life for the better after that.

God bless her, her husband Ed, and those who with me mourn now her loss.

Tinnitus: A Frequent Disability of C-123 Veterans. Should You File a Claim?

Yes. Absolutely submit a VA disability claim!

"It's a fact aircrews know well. Service members who work in and around aircraft are more likely to suffer hearing deficits!" (VA publication)

Aircrew duty in a C-123, C-130 and other military aircraft frequently causes (or worsens) hearing loss and/or ringing in the ears (tinnitus.) Hearing loss is the most common disability claimed by veterans and it is serious. Hearing loss and tinnitus is usually permanent, cumulative, and worsens with aging well past the years of your military service.

When a veteran submits a claim, the VA arranges a hearing test (a "Compensation and Pension Exam.") Then, if the problem meets VA standards, the vet is granted a disability rating, typically ten percent. In 2024 that's about $171 per month, tax-free, for the rest of your life. They also provide medical care with free audiology exams and high-end hearing aids if required. The compensation dates from the day VA receives a claim, so it makes sense to apply immediately if you believe you have the problem. Claims can be submitted on-line or by mail. Major veterans organizations such as DAV, VFW and the American Legion offer free claims assistance, as do all state veterans service departments and most counties.

It is important to know hearing problems can also lead to other, even more serious disabilities. The VA considers these "secondary conditions." Linking these secondary conditions to the initial hearing loss disability can lead to an increased overall disability rating, vital VA medical care for those problems and  greater monthly compensation.

Example: My college roommate had an incident during Army Reserve basic training in 1969 which affected his hearing and was documented. However, that documentation was misfiled into his dental records. Over the years following military service the hearing loss increased greatly and he was convinced (he resisted years of my urging!)  to submit a VA disability claim. He was initially granted a 30% disability rating due to the severity of the hearing problem but his secondary condition of depression related to hearing loss lead to a 100% total disability rating. He initially received a check for around $32,000 and qualified for full federal and state veterans benefits, something Reservists and National Guard personnel don't usually qualify for without active duty service.

This was a significant financial benefit, much needed in his situation. I referred him to Katrina Eagle, an experienced veterans attorney who discovered the "lost" Army documentation for the original 1969 hearing injury, and she convinced the VA to make this veteran's 100% disability rating retroactive - to 1969! The final check for that backdated VA compensation was well over $100,000.

That was certainly an unusual situation, but secondary conditions are important for the VA to address, both in medical care and compensation. Let's look at hearing injury secondary conditions:

Secondary Conditions Related to Aviation Tinnitus or Hearing Loss:

Migraine Headache Conditions Secondary to Tinnitus or Hearing Loss: (continued below)

Master Sergeant Vincent G. McCrave Jr., USAF Retired

We lost one of the best on April 11, 2024! Family and friends gathered to say farewell on April 22 in Clermont, Florida, followed by military honors.

Vinny was a leader in the 74th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron at Westover, and one of the first men I met when I joined in 1974. In a unit full of wonderful people, he was exceptional. 

Vinny was a med tech flight examiner and Desert Storm veteran. He had years of flying the unit's C-123 aircraft, and consequently suffered many of the typical Agent Orange illnesses.

In addition to his beloved wife, he leaves two sons Vincent G. McCrave III and his wife Lynn of Bellville, IL and Michael McCrave and his wife Bev of St. Petersburg, FL. His daughter Michele Bessette of Pawtucket, RI. was especially helpful arranging Vinny's veterans benefits.

He will be missed by eight grandchildren – Dan McCrave-Bessette, Shannon Schwoebel, Britt Whitney, Meghan McCrave, Mitchell McCrave, Matthew McCrave, Thomas Bessette and Hailey Roberson.

April 1987: Vinny's son swearing him in
for another six year reenlistment.

Be at ease, Sergeant McCrave. You honored the flag all your life. Now the flag honors you.

VA Disability Claim Form VA 526EZ now includes Agent Orange C-123 details

 Reference VA Form 526EZ disability claim form.

I hadn't noticed but Veterans Benefit Administration now includes C-123 veterans in their Agent Orange exposure section. BTW: if you haven't checked with VA for their full range of toxic exposure disabilities, do so NOW!

VA 526EZ, Section IV EXPOSURE INFORMAON

Our association's second response to proposed new VA regulation on veterans' hazardous exposure issues.

Our association has posted a second response to the proposed new VA regulation covering veterans' hazardous exposure issues. (First response here.)

The proposed regulation does much to address a wide range of exposure locations and does finally address members of the Reserve Components. It does not mention three earlier failed assurances by the Department of Veterans Affairs in the Federal Register that it would care for veterans who did not serve in the Republic of Vietnam, but were exposed to herbicide agents. Pages from the Federal Register are attached (Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 89, May 8, 2001 and Vol. 73, No. 74, April 16, 2008 and Vol. 75, No. 168, August 31, 2010.)

Instead, Veterans Benefits Administration took steps to insure veterans were refused all care and benefits they should have received for their exposures,  dishonoring VA responses published in the Federal Register.

Between 2001 and 2010, the Department of Veterans Affairs proposed important regulatory changes in the care offered veterans exposed to military herbicides. Responding to public concern for veterans exposed in situations outside the Republic of Vietnam, in three separate and deceptive answers, the VA specifically said no regulatory changes were needed or would be made because:

"If a veteran who did not serve in the Republic of Vietnam, but was
to an herbicide agent defined in 38 CFR 3.307(a)(6) during active military service, has a disease on the list of diseases subject to presumptive service connection, VA will presume that the disease is due to the exposure to herbicides. (See 38 CFR 3.309(e)). 

We therefore believe that there is no need to revise the regulation based on this comment."

By implication, these three deceptive VA responses it also assured Congress that no legislation would be necessary for protection of the affected veterans because the VA had already arranged to offer the same full range of exposure benefits provided Vietnam War veterans.

VA was deceptive between 2001 and 2015 in that, despite assuring the public and Congress that veterans exposed to military herbicides would receive benefits, it instead routinely refused to honor virtually all such claims. A VBA physician and Agent Orange subject matter expert with the "Agent Orange Desk" stated to the Associated Press, "We have to draw the line somewhere." 

The C-123 Veterans Association believes any such "line" may only be drawn in accord with law and regulation, not the preference of VBA staffers determined to block veterans' valid herbicide exposure claims.

VA Regulation M21-1 required it check with the Joint Services Records Research Agency for support of non-Vietnam exposures, but then refused confirmation when offered unless the Agent Orange Desk first requested such confirmation. In many instances, the Agent Orange Desk either refused to make such a request or wouldn't accept JSRRC confirmation even when offered.

This is not ancient history. Veterans and their families were assured of exposure benefits by theVA with empty, dishonored promises made in the Federal Register but were denied those benefits. Note must be made as VA seeks to publish this newest regulation to address earlier failures and deceptions on the same subject.

Respectfully submitted,

W. Carter, The C-123 Veterans Association

Federal Register posts our comment on the VA's new Agent Orange regulation

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/VA-2024-VBA-0006-0044

VA proposes vast new coverage for non-Vietnam Agent Orange exposures. We offered comment on the new regulation.

AR10-Proposed Rule-Adjudication Regulations for Disability or Death Benefit Claims Related to Exposure to Certain Herbicide Agents

COMMENT BY THE C-123 VETERANS ASSOCIATION:

We commend the Department of Veterans Affairs for advancing benefits to affected veterans in this manner and, on the whole, this change is comprehensive and in accord with current law and regulations. There are some flaws. This proposed regulation is not in accord with numerous earlier entries by VA regarding non-Vietnam Agent Orange exposures 

The proposal fails to reference prior commitments made in the Federal Register by VA on this issue. The Department repeatedly assured Congress over the decades that every veteran who did not serve in the Republic of Vietnam but was exposed to Agent Orange during active military service would, upon proof, be offered presumptive service connection for the list of diseases associated with that herbicide. (see Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 89, May 8, 2001 and Vol. 73, No. 74 April 16, 2008 and Vol. 75, No. 168, August 31, 2010). It never met this obligation and denied virtually all such claims.

When affected veterans sought presumptive service connection, even when citing VA promises in the Federal Register, the Department’s Veterans Health Administration Post-Deployment Public Health Section and its Agent Orange Veterans Benefit Administration Agent Orange Desk blocked claims specifically because exposed veterans lacked Vietnam service or, in some cases, because veterans failed to scientifically prove an exposure plus subsequent “bioavailability.” Per the Federal Register entries, proof of exposure alone was all that was required. Redefining the concept of exposure to require “bioavailability” was never in accord with any law or regulation dealing with veterans and Agent Orange. Rather, it was an unofficial office policy. It was also bad science. 

VA denying the fact of an exposure by also requiring proof of bioavailability was deceptive. Bioavailability is a related but separate concept in toxicology, as confirmed by the Director, National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences. Specifically addressing VA using the issue of bioavailability to deny Agent Orange exposure claims, she wrote, “In all my years as a toxicologist, I have never heard bioavailability as part of the exposure definition.” 

The Department’s failure with firm commitments first made in 2001 has been to the great disservice of affected veterans and their families. VA repeatedly assured Congress that it needed no new legislation or revision to regulations to meet its obligation. VA withstood Congressional concern with Agent Orange claims for veterans’ exposures outside the Republic of Vietnam using deceptive assurances while at the same time denying virtually all such claims. The Federal Register must account for earlier entries from the Department of Veterans Affairs in its submission of this newer regulation or else muddy the Register’s historical record. Clearly, “exposure” was the sole requirement for presumptive service connection, yet VA failed to honor the three assurances made to Congress. Cited below is the Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 89, May 8, 2001, the first of these failed assurances:

“…if a veteran who did not serve in the Republic of Vietnam, but was exposed to an herbicide agent defined in 38 CFR 3.307(a)(6) during active military service, has a disease on the list of diseases subject to presumptive service connection, VA will presume that the disease is due to the exposure to herbicides. (See 38 CFR 3.309(e).”

Respectfully submitted,

The C-123 Veterans Association

BULLETIN: VA to ease benefits rules for exposures to Agent Orange in the US

VA eases rules for exposures to Agent Orange in the US

Thousands of veterans exposed to Agent Orange while serving in the United States will for the first time be eligible for fast-track disability benefits under plans unveiled by the Department of Veterans Affairs on Friday. As readers of this blog are aware (and as the new rules reiterate,) C-123 veterans are already considered presumptively exposed to Agent Orange and eligible for full veterans' benefits thereby. This coverage dates from June 2015.

The move represents another major expansion of toxic exposure benefits for veterans, this time for individuals suffering from illnesses dating back to the Vietnam War era. The changes follow mandates included in the Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act — better known as the PACT Act — passed by Congress in August 2022.

Over the last two years, a combination of administration moves and new legislation opened access to disability benefits for millions of veterans who incurred injuries from burn pit smoke, radiation contamination and other military toxic exposure events.

In a statement, VA Secretary Denis McDonough said the proposed moves “would make it easier for veterans exposed to herbicides who served outside Vietnam to access the benefits they so rightly deserve.

“Our goal is to provide every veteran of every era with the VA health care and benefits they deserve, and this is another step in the right direction,” McDonough said.

Rules outlining the change were filed in the Federal Register on Friday, and will still take several months before going into effect. The new proposal would give presumptive benefits status to veterans who served in “locations where herbicides were tested, used, or stored outside of Vietnam.”

That includes military locations in 12 states — Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, New York, Tennessee, Texas and Utah — where Agent Orange was present in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. A full list of the specific states and times is available on the VA website.

The rule would also cover troops stationed at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in New Brunswick, Canada, in June 1966 and June 1967; individuals stationed in Kumbla, India, in 1945 and 1946; and expanded timelines for troops who served in Cambodia, the Johnston Atoll, Guam, American Samoa, Korea, Laos, and Thailand during the 1960s and 1970s.

A full list of these foreign locations is also available on VA websites.

Troops who served in Vietnam between January 1962 and May 1975 — either on the ground or in waterways around the country — already qualify for presumptive benefits status by the department because of Agent Orange exposure.

The toxic defoliant has been linked to a host of cancers and heart illnesses. Presumptive status means that individuals who develop certain illnesses believed caused by the chemicals do not have to document specific instances where they were exposed, but instead only provide service records showing they were in the area (or the C-123 unit) to be presumed contaminated.

As a result, advocates have pushed for broader use of presumptive status for troops who served around toxic chemicals while in the military but may not have been able to document every instance of exposure because of records lost over the years.

More information on Agent Orange presumptive benefits is available on the VA website.

UPDATE (now opened again) National Museum of the Air Force Closed Until Further Notice

According to a museum representative, water supply issues have prompted the closure of the museum.

Happy Birthday, Spam! Famous "delicacy" launched 85 years ago today.

 Most of us would prefer something more eatable, but somehow this stuff still sells.

Before eating processed meats, you might want to re-read Upton Sinclair's The Urban Jungle and the industry's use of diseased, rotten and contaminated animal carouses:

"… and as for the other men, who worked in tank rooms full of steam, and in some of which there were open vats near the level of the floor, their peculiar trouble was that they fell into the vats; and when if fished out, there was never enough of them left to be worth exhibiting—so sometimes they would be overlooked and the vat processed anyway, out to the world as Durham's Pure Leaf Lard!"

"They were regular alchemists at Durham’s; they advertised a mushroom-catsup, and the men who made it did not know what a mushroom looked like...  And then there was ‘potted game’ and ‘potted grouse,’ ‘potted ham,’ and ‘deviled ham’—de-vyled, as the men called it. ‘De-vyled’ ham was made out of the waste ends of smoked beef that were too small to be sliced by the machines; and also tripe, dyed with chemicals so that it would not show white; and trimmings of hams and corned beef; and potatoes, skins and all; and finally the hard cartilaginous gullets of beef, after the tongues had been cut out. All this ingenious mixture was ground up and flavored with spices to make it taste like something perhaps eatable."

Yum!

VA's initial denial of C-123 Agent Orange exposure claims - ABSURD!

A little history about VBA's deceptions and cruelty in treating Agent Orange claims:

We started discussions with VA about C-123 Agent Orange exposure in 2010 and met brick-wall resistance. In 2012 we were told during an in-person conference with Mr. Tom Murphy (Director of VBA Benefits Administration) and his staff that VA had already concluded no C-123 crew or maintainer exposure was possible.

Adding a kicker that this, he told me directly that regardless of what medical, scientific or military evidence we might present then or in the future, absolutely no C-123 claims for Agent Orange exposure would ever be approved. 

For claims that were denied and then appealed to the Board of Veterans Appeals, here is the boilerplate denial verbiage they came up with:

VA's Office of Public Health is noted to have thoroughly reviewed all available scientific information regarding the exposure potential to residual amounts of herbicides on the C-123 aircraft surfaces. It was concluded that the potential exposure for the post-Vietnam crews that flew or maintained the aircraft was extremely low and therefore it was concluded that the risk of long-term health effects was minimal.

Naturally, I inquired as to exactly what was meant by their "thoroughly reviewed all available scientific information". VA's answer was they'd simply reached a staff consensus in the VHA Post-Deployment Public Health office that no exposure threat existed. And if there was any exposure, it wasn't significant "enough" to cause any adverse health effects. In other words, there was NO such thorough review of relevant literature and only a knee-jerk decision to deny claims.

And boy, did they ever deny claims! Every single one of them.*

I'll point out here that prior to meeting with Murphy, VA had been provided input from numerous scientific and medical authorities as to our exposures. Columbia University, Yale, University of Texas, Oregon Health Sciences University and others had specifically concluded that C-123 vets had been exposed to Agent Orange. I'll remind readers that VA is required to give every benefit of the doubt to veterans' claims, to review claims sympathetically and in a pro-veteran manner yet"required" didn't seem to apply to C-123 claims.

Other federal authorities had also chimed in to support us against VA: the CDC Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry had reported to VA that C-123 veterans experienced 180 times the published military exposure threshold for Agent Orange. Further, that we have a 200-fold greater risk of cancers developing. Eventually, even the Army's Joint Services Records Research Center tried to tell VA we met exposure requirements, but VA's Mr. Jim Sampsel refused to recognize such input. Note here that VA's own regulations specified that Joint Services Records Research Center input was authoritative as regards Agent Orange exposure claims. Nonetheless, Sampsel disputed everything. (Later, Sampsel even told VA's Disability Compensation Committee that Agent Orange was merely hype and hysteria.)

It seems VA was very selective as to what "available scientific information" they were willing to consider, and that nothing affirming the veterans' exposure would be acceptable to them. And nothing ever was acceptable, at least until the Institute of Medicine virtually jammed it down their throats in January 2015.

* Here was a special VA deception. Every single C-123 claim was denied until June 2015, yet Sampsel and Murphy insisted there was no "blanket denial" policy. Clearly, their only policy was that none would ever be approved regardless of what the policy might be named. They disingenuously insisted that each claim was carefully evaluated on its merits, while quietly pretending that C-123 claims were without any merit regardless of medical and scientific evidence.