bobbyq

Please remember DMZ also qualifies for Agent Orange bennies. Vet I know on DMZ Korea eventually got PTSD , heart condition, etc. File all they can do is say no. Good luck

Hey I was reading the proposed reduction AND it says it shows SOME improvement not that it is definite. I sent in my dissatisfaction on SOME improvement. I guess that will tell them I am to have a follow up in September with a real oncologist. This site and vets are awesome

Thanks guys. I have no computer nor access to one. Small town virus has us shut down I am not really literate. That's why I am screwed any call I make they are working from home. The decision says the evaluation of left tonsilhigh-grade diffuse large B cell Non-hodgkin's lymphoma is based on Inactive disease (38 CFR 4.311) I have up coming exam in Sept

Got 100% back in 2018 for Non-hodgkin's lymphoma. One march 2020 I get a letter for reexamination. I live in the sticks no VA so I get sent to a Winnebago 60 miles away for an exam. Go into the Winnebago they draw blood I go home. No exam. Two weeks later I get a decision that I am being lowered to 20%. Effective 1 May. Kick in the butt for serving in Nam.

FYI VA has also acknowledged that Agent Orange was, in some instances, used in the Kingdom of Thailand and has developed specific procedures to determine whether a veteran was exposed to herbicides in locations other than the Republic of Vietnam or along the DMZ in Korea. See VA's Adjudication Procedure Manual, M21-1MR, Part IV, Subpart ii, Chapter 1, Section H, para. 5-7. Additionally, effective June 19, 2015, VA amended its regulation governing individuals presumed to have been exposed to certain herbicides by expanding the regulation to include an additional group consisting of individuals who performed service in the Air Force or Air Force Reserve under circumstances in which they had regular and repeated contact with C-123 aircraft known to have been used to spray an herbicide agent during the Vietnam era. Specifically, the new regulation states that an individual who performed service in the Air Force or Air Force Reserve under circumstances in which the individual concerned regularly and repeatedly operated, maintained, or served onboard C-123 aircraft known to have been used to spray an herbicide agent during the Vietnam era shall be presumed to have been exposed during such service to an herbicide agent. For purposes of this section, "regularly and repeatedly operated, maintained or served onboard C-123 aircraft" means that the individual was assigned to an Air Force or Air Force Reserve squadron when the squadron was permanently assigned one of the affected aircraft and the individual had an Air Force Specialty Code indicating duties as a flight, ground maintenance, or medical crew member of such aircraft. 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(v). Despite the foregoing, the United Stated Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that when a veteran is found not to be entitled to a regulatory presumption of service connection for a given disability the claim must nevertheless be reviewed to determine whether service connection can be established on a direct basis. Combee v. Brown, 34 F.3d 1039, 1043-1044 (Fed.Cir.1994), rev'g in part Combee v. Principi, 4 Vet. App. 78 ( Comes from the Board of Veteran Appeals

Hey guy do not pay for nada. There is an Air Force book Air Defense in the Republic of Vietnam and if you go to the internet you can find it by Roger P Fox and it has all the air bases and how many rockets and mortars they took and how much damage there was. Binh Hoa is there and so is Saigon. If you are looking for stressors this is an excellent publication I have used it over and over for various claims. It is dated 1961-1973. I can not tell you how important of a document this is. Q

Hey depending on your request it take three to six months. I have some reports from Tan San Nhut AB 1968 TET. Also have some after actions reports for the Corps. Be willing to share if it is helpful

iN AZ IF YOU AND YOUR FAMILY LIVE IN A WHEEL BARROW YOU DO NOT QUALIFY.........YOU ARE TOO RICH

Do you remember going to the VA and seeing ALL those old timers there? I am going to be 70 next week and realize that "all of a sudden" I am the old timer.

This is what the reply was from the VA the VA wording on the decision they sent her.........we denied your claim for Dependecncy and Indeminity Compensation, Death Benefits and Accured Benefits. On October 2015 we wrote and asked you to send us completed marital history on VA Form 21-686 because we did not receive it we are denying your claim. This is where the 686 came into play. The SHARE screen clip shows she is ALREADY a dependent PRIOR to the vets death. They accepted her substitute so do I need a 21-4138 to the VA and say, why do we need a 21-686 when prior to the VETS death you had a Share program that showed her as a dependent and you also accepted her as a substitute for the Appeal.

Here is what is in the VA veterans "C" file that shows a dependent. Hope that clarifies it.

Ok the Hep C case. That is under appeal and the wife HAS been accepted as the substitute BUT when she filed for the Death benefits, DIC, etc. they now want a 686. I do not believe she would get DIC any how because he was only 40% but they should pay for the funeral and accompanying bills right? And no these folks were married for over five years. I went and asked the VA, do you have a 686 on file. They said no, but the have in the C file VA "SNIPPING TOOL" ??? document from the vets claim when he was alive and it shows her relationship as spouse, SS#, and DOB. As I said she was listed as a dependent PRIOR to the VETS death but NOW they want the 686 and have denied her benefits (burial etc.) Question is IF she was a dependent during the VETS claim when he was receiving benefits why is she not a dependent now? And as you mentioned why did they accept her as a substitute. Sorry about the confusion I will keep the other claim out of the conversation. I apologize for muddying the waters, it is just that I am soooooo stressed out with these folks at the VA. Q

WHOA WHOA, TWO DIFFERENT CASES GUYS SORRY FOR THE CONFUSTION. The marriage one was from Alaska then AZ and had nothing to do with the Hep C case which is the one who was requesting the 686 for the DIC, Death benefits, etc. that were and are being denied and this case is under appeal with her as a substitute.

the VA wording.........we denied your claim for Dependecncy and Indeminity Compensation, Death Benefits and Accured Benefits. On October 2015 we wrote and asked you to send us completed marital history on VA Form 21-686 because we did not receive it we are denying your claim. But I have a VA "SNIPPING TOOL" ??? document from the vets claim when he was alive and it shows her relationship as spouse, SS#, and DOB. On the HEP C I have a VA Fast Letter 04-13 Relationship between immunization with Jet Injectors and Hep C infection as it relates to service connection. I have a decision from Appeals entitlement to s/c for hep C Citation Nr: 1410959 in which the Vet got Jet Injectors shots and the BVA ordered entitlement to s/c for hep C. All this went to the VA but they did not look at it and it is NOT on the evidence of the SOC. Appreciate the help as I said I am fed up with the VA. Not to add to the woes, listen to this a vet 100% has his spouse as a dependent and she has an ID Commissary card. Into the years they get married by clergy and tell the VA. The vet dies six months into the marriage so the VA rescinds her dependency because they were only married six months. The other years did not count because it was common law and they did not know it was illegal since she was awarded dependency. Fight that one also. Goes on forever. VETS DO NOT STAND A CHANCE, YOU NEED TO PUNCH SOMEONE IN THE FACE!!!