The following diseases are deemed
associated with herbicide exposure, under VA law: chloracne or other acne
form diseases consistent with chloracne, Hodgkin's disease, multiple myeloma,
non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, acute and sub acute peripheral neuropathy, porphyria
cutanea tarda, prostate cancer, respiratory cancers (cancer of the lung,
bronchus, larynx, or trachea), soft-tissue sarcomas (other than osteosarcoma,
chondrosarcoma, Kaposi's sarcoma, or mesothelioma and diabetes mellitus
(Type 2)).
See 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e); see also 38
U.S.C.A. § 1116(f), as added by § 201(c) of the "Veterans Education and
Benefits Expansion Act of 2001," Pub. L. No. 107-103, 115 Stat. 976 (2001)
(which added diabetes mellitus (Type 2) to the list of presumptive diseases
as due to herbicide exposure). For purposes of this section, the term acute
and sub acute peripheral neuropathy means transient peripheral neuropathy
that appears within weeks or months of exposure to an herbicide agent and
resolves within two years of the date of onset. 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e).
The foregoing diseases shall be service
connected if a veteran was exposed to a herbicide agent during active
military, naval, or air service, if the requirements of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1116,
38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(iii) are met, even though there is no record of such
disease during service, provided further that the rebuttable presumption
provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1113 and 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(d) are also
satisfied.
In order to establish service
connection by presumption, based on herbicide exposure, the diseases listed
above (see 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e)) shall have become manifest to a degree of
10 percent or more at any time after service, except that chloracne or other
acne form disease consistent with chloracne, porphyria cutanea tarda and
acute or sub acute peripheral neuropathy shall have become manifest to a
degree of 10 percent or more within a year after the last date on which the
veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during active military, naval or
air service. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(ii).
Get help with your claim. several
agencies such as DAV & VFW are willing to help you. Be persistent, it will
take time, don't give up!
These cases are appeals that (in some
cases) concern agent orange exposures that occurred in locations other than
Vietnam. (Print and include in your
claim, if it can apply to you.)
Left Click to View, Right Click to
Save
-
- Citation Nr: 9916522
- Decision Date: 06/16/99
- Archive Date: 06/21/99
Appeals Case involving a
veteran who served at Nakhon Phanom RTAFB. Case determined that credible
evidence sustains a reasonable probability that the veteran was exposed to
Agent Orange while in Thailand.
A 2 page memo from Col. Russell, USAF.
It is not in good shape but if you look at the 5th line of the 3rd
paragraph you can make out the name Nakhom Phanom. The memo is in reference
to Col. Russell trying to find C-123 Ranch Hand aircraft that could be
refitted for aerial spraying of Malathion to take care of a mosquito problem
in South Vietnam. Colonel Russell and Col. Mosley talked to a Col.
Fredrick, then commander of the 315th ACW (later renamed to SOW) about
available aircraft. Col. Fredrick told them he had 6 C123s at NKP that could
be drawn from for re-outfitting. the 315th was the wing responsible for
spraying Agent Orange.
Col Russell A Downey
Memo Page 1
Col Russel A Downey
Memo Page 2
Download from VSPA in Adobe
Format.
-
- Citation NR: 9604685
- Decision Date: 02/27/96
- Archive Date: 03/08/96
The appeals court determined that
service connection should be granted for the cause of the veteran's death,
respiratory insufficiency due to extensive metastatic adenocarcinoma of the
lungs. While stationed in Thailand from October 1971 to September 1972,
the veteran served as the Airborne Weapons
Technician Crew Chief aboard AC-130 gunships and served as lead gunner
during in-flight operations. He flew missions over Vietnam and at times
landed in Vietnam for refueling and rearming. The appellant
maintains that the veteran was exposed to Agent Orange while in service and
that herbicide exposure caused him to develop the lung cancer which
eventually resulted in his death. (Landing in Vietnam is the key to this
case.)
Download from VA in Text Format
-
- Citation Nr: 0418252
- Decision Date: 07/09/04
- Archive Date: 07/21/04
At the time of the initial
award of service connection for histiocytic type malignant lymphoma, the
record contained medical evidence confirming a diagnosis of histiocytic type
malignant lymphoma shortly after discharge, the veteran's plausible
allegations of in-service herbicide exposure, and corroboration of the
veteran's service in Thailand and his maintenance work on B-57 aircraft.
-
- Citation Nr: 0527748
- Decision Date: 10/13/05
- Archive Date: 10/25/05
Entitlement to service
connection for diabetes mellitus secondary to herbicide exposure for a
veteran stationed on Guam. The veteran had active service from December 1966
to December 1970, including in Guam from December 1966 to October 1968.
-
- Citation Nr: 0209347
- Decision Date: 08/07/02
- Archive Date: 08/12/02
The veteran served on active duty from
October 1967 to June 1971, including a nine month tour of duty in the
Thailand. Peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities is causally related
to the veteran's service-connected bilateral tarsal tunnel syndrome.
-
- Citation Nr: 0418252
- Decision Date: 07/09/04
- Archive Date: 07/21/04
The veteran was awarded service
connection for histiocytic type malignant lymphoma in a January 1995 rating
decision. At the time of the initial award of service connection for
histiocytic type malignant lymphoma, the record contained medical evidence
confirming a diagnosis of histiocytic type malignant lymphoma shortly after
discharge, the veteran's plausible allegations of in-service herbicide
exposure, and corroboration of the veteran's service in Thailand and his
maintenance work on B-57 aircraft.
-
- Citation Nr: 0118277
- Decision Date: 07/12/01
- Archive Date: 07/17/01
Case is not settled but interesting
comment from The file also included a statement from Michael G. Ratelle, who
had two years experience working for the Ministry of Public Health in
Thailand and who found that Agent Orange "more than likely" contributed to
the development of the appellant's squamous cell carcinoma.
Download from The VA in Text Format
-
- Citation Nr: 0333331
- Decision Date: 11/28/03
- Archive Date: 12/10/03
In this case, the veteran is not
entitled to presumptive service connection because he never served in
Vietnam during the Vietnam era. Instead, he claims that he was exposed to
herbicides while stationed at the Royal Thai Air Force Bases in Korat,
Thailand from 1970 to 1971. He maintains that he worked as an inventory
specialist and he was responsible for maintaining a certain quantity of
herbicides that were being used in Vietnam. He also alleges that herbicides
were being sprayed around the perimeter of the base. In support of the
veteran's claim, D.S. submitted a statement confirming that herbicides were
being stored at the Air Force Based in Korat. D.S. explained that he and the
veteran were assigned to the base supply system and that their duties
included counting and inspecting barrels containing chemicals which had
arrived from supply depots in Vietnam. According to D.S., leaking chemical
from some of the barrels was carried over the storage area and looked like a
greasy tar pit. D.S. maintained that he and the veteran were exposed to
these chemicals on their skin, in their food, and from the air they
breathed. When the shelf life had expired, the chemicals were transported to
an open pit and burned under the veteran's supervision. Unfortunately, there
is no presumption of exposure to herbicide agents in Thailand. However, in
light of the statements provided by the veteran and D.S. concerning the use
and storage of herbicides at the Air Force Base in Korat, Thailand, VA
should attempt to obtain confirmation from appropriate sources.
-
- Citation Nr: 0327969
- Decision Date: 10/17/03
- Archive Date: 10/28/03
Entitlement to service connection for
Type II diabetes mellitus, as result of herbicide exposure in Thailand.
This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a
May 2002 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional
Office (RO) in Muskogee, Oklahoma. The veteran testified before the
undersigned at a videoconference hearing held in April 2003. The veteran
contends that his Type II diabetes mellitus is the result of exposure to
herbicides during service in Thailand while he was in the Air Force. Service
records confirm that the veteran was assigned to the 1982nd Communications
Squadron at Ubon Air Field in Thailand from 1969 to 1972. At the hearing, the
veteran reported that he had been receiving VA treatment for his diabetes
since March or April 2002.
-
- Citation NR: 9800877
- Decision Date: 01/13/98
- Archive Date: 01/21/98
Entitlement to service connection for
prostate cancer due to Agent Orange exposure. The veteran had active service
from July 1960 to October 1963. Credible evidence sustains a reasonable
probability that the veteran was exposed to dioxins while serving in
Okinawa.
Haas v. VADC
Veterans who patrolled the waters off Vietnam can now claim
disability benefits for exposure to Agent Orange under an appeals court
ruling that opens the door for thousands of servicemen to seek medical
coverage. The ruling was handed down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims in the case of Haas v. VADC-Nicholson by a former sailor who
served on an ammunition ship during the Vietnam War but never stepped foot
on land. The court's order, issued 16 AUG, reverses the Veterans Affairs
Department's denial of benefits for Jonathan L. Haas, who blamed his
diabetes, nerve damage and loss of eyesight on exposure to Agent Orange.
Haas, represented by the National Veterans Legal Services (NVLS) argued that
clouds of the toxic defoliate, which the U.S. sprayed on Vietnamese jungles,
drifted out to sea, engulfing his ship and landing on his skin. Veterans
officials said that to qualify for coverage, Haas was required to have
docked in Vietnam and come ashore.
The three-judge panel said regulations governing the benefits were
unclear. The court said it made no sense for veterans who patrolled
Vietnam's inland waterways and those simply passing through the country to
receive medical coverage while those serving at sea do not. "Veterans
serving on vessels in close proximity to land would have the same risk of
exposure to the herbicide Agent Orange as veterans serving on adjacent land,
or an even greater risk than that borne by those veterans who may have
visited and set foot on the land of the Republic of Vietnam only briefly,"
Judge William A. Moorman wrote. The Court did not actually award a
disability to Haas, but sent his case back to the Board for that
determination. If the Board rules in his favor, the Court directed that his
other Agent Orange-related medical conditions also must be compensated. The
Veterans Affairs Department said Friday that it was reviewing the opinion
and was not sure how many veterans would be affected or how much the added
coverage would cost.
This VCAA decision could eventually expand to cover more veterans than
the decision appears to now cover. During Vietnam was a short time frame
where military service within the Theater of Operations within the Vietnam
War justified the Vietnam Service Medal. This included waters off the coast
{so called brown water}, deep waters for air operations {so called blue
water operations}, Thailand based Operations for USAF and other types of
operations which included loading the Agent Orange aircraft. Most Vietnam
combat veterans receive some medical benefits, but if their illnesses are
related to their service, they could receive full coverage and their
families might be eligible for benefits. David Houppert, director of
veteran's benefits for the Vietnam Veterans of America, said the ruling
could allow thousands of veterans to seek coverage for service-related
illnesses. Most are Navy veterans, he said, but some Marines and Army
veterans could be affected. Houppert said his group was encouraging these
veterans to seek coverage quickly because the ruling left it up to
government officials whether to change federal regulations in a way that
could deny coverage. Vets can refer to
www.vba.va.gov/bln/21/benefits/herbicide/#bm04
to review what benefits they could be eligible for.
As of 20 AUG the VADC-legal office had not filed a request for a stay
order pending an appeal to the Supreme Court. The Board of Veterans'
Appeals is sitting at the Phoenix VARO. The senior judge has agreed to
contact his office in Washington DC to get current guidance on
implementation of this decision. The VCAA ruling over turned a BVA decision
on Haas. If the VADC-Sec Nicholson's office does not appeal they have no
choice but to grant service connected for Agent Orange Presumptive
Disabilities with military service with in the theater of Vietnam war for
those with the Vietnam Service Medal. This decision will mean a potential
liability of millions of dollars to the VA Medical budget and VA
Administrative budget. Potential claims from the wives of already deceased
Vietnam veterans could also mean considerable liability. This helps explain
why the VADC has been slow to provide positive guidance about this VCAA
decision. Haas is now the law of the land and therefore VA must abide by
it. However, it is possible that VA may amend their regulations in such a
way that it is adverse to veterans who otherwise would have benefited from
the court's decision. Service organizations are recommending that other
veterans like Mr. Haas who served offshore but did not set foot in Vietnam,
and who suffer from diseases or conditions that they believe to be caused by
exposure to Agent Orange should consider filing a claim for disability.
Members who have had such claims denied may wish to re-file based on the
Court's decision. Veterans are encouraged to seek the advice and assistance
of an experienced veterans' service organization before proceeding. [Source:
Associated Press article 18 Aug & Arizona Department of Veterans' Services
message 23 Aug 06 ]
VA Guide to Agent Orange Benefits
Potential Change in
Appeals Process
A bill which would allow veterans to
hire lawyers to represent them in their efforts to obtain federal benefits
from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has been introduced by U.S.
Senators
Larry Craig (R-Idaho) and
Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina). Under current law, all 24 million
living veterans are prohibited from hiring a lawyer to help them navigate
the Veterans Affairs system. It is only after a veteran has spent months and
even years exhausting the extensive VA administrative process that the
veteran then may retain counsel - a process that often takes 3 or more years
to complete. Under the current appeals system, about 85 percent of veterans
choose to be represented by Veterans' Service Organizations or state
veterans agency personnel.
Agent
Orange in Thailand ?