jamescripps2

As the first veteran to be granted AO exposure at a post or base inside CONUS, I am asked many questions. The most prevalent question is," how long is AO toxic after application",  for the purpose, and in the amount, needed to win an AO claim outside of Vietnam and Korea. The short answer is that there is no answer. In order to win my claim I had a statement from the world's foremost agent orange expert who states that once AO enters the sub soil, 100 years. On the other hand, some experts reply that it quickly evaporates in the foliage and tends to never make it to the ground, and even if it does, the residuals are not detectable and are non toxic after three days in sunlight.
The real answer is that, after application, Agent Orange remains toxic after application for as long as you can get can an expert to to say that it is!  That expert needs to back up his expert opinion with a sound rational supported by  experience, education, and/or scientific principles.
It seems as though the VA uses the expert opinion of their choice to deny claims, while the DOD and the US government use a different expert opinion of their own choice to award untold millions for cleanup of toxic soil in Vietnam, fifty years after the fact! Where are your environmental experts, and how do you locate them? They are the top toxicology professors at the numerous colleges and universities across America. How do you get a statement from someone with such glorious credentials? Do your DD and research to find out where such professionals are located and email them. Tell them what you need and why you need it. I emailed the top five toxicology professors across the US and received three highly probative statements. One of those experts who wrote a statement worked for the CDC. in Atlanta GA. and had been involved in AO research.
If you can get that kind of expert evidence in your claims folder, it is unlikely that the VA can refute it and you didn't pay $10.000 for the expert opinion. You will still face a uphill battle that I would expect to only be awarded at the BVA or COVA. Be mindful and aware, it takes three elements to win your direct exposure AO claim. You still need to have a diagnosis of one of the AO recognized disease and at least one well written nexus letter. I would suggest several nexus letters. I had thirteen nexus letters and never paid more than a medicare co-payment for any of them. As there is no presumptive of exposure outside of Korea and Vietnam, you will need to show exactly how, when, and where you was directly exposed to AO. If you don't have one of the diseases on the AO list, but you are convinced that your disease may have been caused by AO exposure, anywhere, at any time during service, you then have an uphill and almost insurmountable battle. Not an impossible scenario but definitely not a task for the faint of heart. You will need rock solid IMOs and IMEs. You will need to be tenacious and focused, do your research and respond with all of the DD that it is going to require of you. My advice on a claim like that is that if you don't intend to finish it, then don't start it.
There are opinions that most AO claims have already been filed and decided long ago, so why would I be posting something like this? Just wait until the proposed new AO conditions are added to the AO list and you will understand, new claims will come out of the woodwork, and that is the reason why I went to the trouble to post this information.

I never paid more than a $15.00 or $30.00 copay for an IME or a an IMO. It takes a disabled veteran years of misery to accumulate $10,000 in backpay. A veteran should not have to be rich to win a VA claim, nor should they be. Some of those high priced doctors used college to get a deferment and never served their country a day.  As far as the expensive college education, truth be known, most probably didn't even pay back tax payer money for the education loan. 
 

This claim was originally filed in 2003 and was denied several times, lost a few times, kicked around to various regional offices and eventually remanded for a C&P exam. I was asked to take a look in 2011 and I started working feverishly with the widow. There was a lot of evidence gathering in the face of the usual sea of naysayers but we never lost focus. It is very difficult for a Thailand veteran to win, much less the thought of a sole surviving widow signing on upon the death of the veteran and seeing the claim through to a win. Needless to say, the evidence needed to be overwhelming. I venture to say that this the very first win for a sole surviving spouse in a Thailand herbicide exposure claim. It is important to note that the veteran was not an MP nor was he a dog handler. When it is posted on the BVA list of prior decisions web site it is DOCKET NO. 09-17 560 and dated June 02, 2014.

It is such an honor for me to be able to work these kind of claims to a win. I expect that a 100% award will be awarded in the claim because the death of the veteran was the result of the now service connected chronic lymphocytic leukemia.



The following is an excerpt from an email that I received from the widow this afternoon.

It has been a long, emotional, and painful ordeal, but I did receive a letter today from the Board of Veteran’s Appeal that says – For accrued benefits purposes, service connection for chronic lymphocytic leukemia is granted.

I had James Cripps, a friend who has guided me, the first vet to win an AO claim stateside, who works daily with vets – read the decision tonight to re-assure me.

I am going to copy two paragraphs that I thought was so interesting and James also pointed it out:
An August 2007memorandum of the Compensation and Pension Service confirmed that herbicides such as Agent Orange were only applied in Thailand from April-September, 1964, 3 ½ years prior to the Veteran’s duty there. Moreover, the only application site in Thailand was the Pranburi Military Reservation, not U-Tapao. However, the memorandum determined that routine maintenance such as brush clearing, weed killing, and range management was conducted by the base civil engineer at U-Tapao, and that involved commercial herbicides applied by certified applicators. The memorandum notes that security police units and dog handlers were known to have walked the perimeters and therefore have a greater likelihood of exposure to commercial pesticides and herbicides.

Several letters were submitted by fellow-servicemen who served with the Veteran, or served at the same base in Thailand. These accounts endorsed the Veteran’s assertion that he was present at the perimeter of the base at U-Tapao. While the Veteran is not presumed to have been exposed to any herbicide based on his service, based on the Veteran’s assertions as corroborated by these statements, the Board finds that, it is at least likely as not that he was actually exposed to herbicides during his service.

If it is indeed a slam dunk, why did you even need an attorney? A legal team and an attorney cannot speed up your claim. Just because you have an attorney does not mean that you can buck the line.

First of all, the negative attitude will not earn you one dime and it is hard on your social and family life. Now, file the other claims and forget going back to work. if you are successful with the other claims you just might achieve the "S" award 100% TDIU + 60%. That would help the piggy bank more than a 100% P&T scheduler rating. Unless you just like the sound, the ring and bragging rights of that type of award.
Think about it. If you go back to work, you chance loosing the TDIU along with the chapter 35 benefits for the family. All that you are allowed to make and keep the TDIU is income that is not considered as gainful employment. Drawing compensation at the VA 100% rate is not peanuts and it is pretty good tax free income if you can manage to live within your means. Next, consider what insurance for those kids would cost you. If you go back to work, the cost of working in itself is not cheap, gas and automobile up keep in consideration of the increased mileage to work and back. Child care and education?
Tip, You say about 4 years. If you can wait until the fifth year is up to rock the VA boat it really makes it hard for the VA to decrease your compensation if you have been at the same rate for a continuous five year period. The burden of proof of substantial and sustained improvement would fall on the VA after the five year period is up.
Do you have any decisions that will become final where there is a substantial amount of back pay to be lost if you do wait until the five year period is up? That may enter into your decision and options.
Good luck. Thanks for your service and welcome home brother!

Berta got a bee in her bonnet, give em hell Berta.

After many years of working untold numbers veterans claims, After winning the first ever VA claim for AO inside CONUS FOR MYSELF. After producing the next three AO claims to win inside CONUS for other veterans. After winning a Korea AO claim for a veteran not serving in a unit on the DMZ. After winning a Thailand AO related sole surviving widow's claim for DIC along with accrued benefits for a non dog handler stationed at Utapao AFB. If I could sum it all up and explain in one sentence the most important fact of all, the most underutilized, hard to comprehend and misunderstood tool in veterans claims it would have to be, 
IF YOU CAN GET A DOCTOR TO SAY ITS SO, ITS SO. IF THAT DON'T WORK FOR YOU GET TWO DOCTORS TO SAY THAT ITS SO. IF THAT DON'T WORK, GET THREE!
WHY TAKE A CHANCE, GET THREE TO BEGIN WITH AND NAIL IT THE FIRST TIME AROUND.
HOW CAN A VETERAN AFFORD TO DO THAT ON A TIGHT BUDGET?  I PLAN TO DISCUSS THIS EXACT IMPORTANT TOPIC ON THE PODCAST COMING UP ON THURSDAY EVENING OCTOBER 27TH. 6:00 CENTRAL TIME.

Good letter indeed, but it fails to make a connection between OSA and asthama or sinus congestion.

After many years of working untold numbers veterans claims, After winning the first ever VA claim for AO inside CONUS FOR MYSELF. After producing the next three AO claims to win inside CONUS for other veterans. After winning a Korea AO claim for a veteran not serving in a unit on the DMZ. After winning a Thailand AO related sole surviving widow's claim for DIC along with accrued benefits for a non dog handler stationed at Utapao AFB. If I could sum it all up and explain in one sentence the most important fact of all, the most underutilized, hard to comprehend and misunderstood tool in veterans claims it would have to be, 
IF YOU CAN GET A DOCTOR TO SAY ITS SO, ITS SO. IF THAT DON'T WORK FOR YOU GET TWO DOCTORS TO SAY THAT ITS SO. IF THAT DON'T WORK, GET THREE!
WHY TAKE A CHANCE, GET THREE TO BEGIN WITH AND NAIL IT THE FIRST TIME AROUND.
HOW CAN A VETERAN AFFORD TO DO THAT ON A TIGHT BUDGET?  I PLAN TO DISCUSS THIS EXACT IMPORTANT TOPIC ON THE PODCAST COMING UP ON THURSDAY EVENING OCTOBER 27TH. 6:00 CENTRAL TIME.

Go fot it!  Sounds like a winner to me, especially if the hint of insidious inception of the disease is noted in your SMRs. A good nexus letter from your doctor would be a must.
I helped a lady Navy veteran win her claim for menieres. Her disease was noted on her SMRs and is so bad that she can no longer drive.

The Board’s mailing address:
Board of Veterans’ Appeals (01)
810 Vermont Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20420
Fax number: (202) 632-5842
Web address: http://www.bva.va.gov/
Status inquiries: bvaombudsman@va.gov; (800) 923-8387; (202) 632-4623 (M-F, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. EST)
Check the status of your appeal online at: https://www.ebenefits.va.gov/

Never assume anything, My preference would dictate that you deliver the document directly to the RO and request  a date stamped copy back. If that is not possible mail it Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested. Include a waiver of review by the office of original jurisdiction to keep the RO from bouncing your claim for another review and that waiver needs to be included no matter how you deliver the claim to the RO. IMHO the exam in itself will trigger a RO review and therefore a new decision.That might even produce a grant by the RO, thereby short stopping the long drawn out traditional appeal process without you doing anything.
If you get a letter from the BVA communicating that they received your claim in Washington at the BVA, send them a copy too, but make sure you send a waiver of review of the AOJ.  Again send it CMRRR.

Buck, it sounds to me like your rating is right. If you were awarded a100% TDIU rating and then obtained an additional  rating of at least 60% that produced the inferred "s" award.

I am at "M" +1k and have won hundreds of claims for other vets besides my own multiple claims. I have never paid more than a $30.00 copay for a IOM and never recommended that expense for anyone else. Any medical professional can write the opinion and therefore fulfill the requirement of the nexus without emptying the piggy bank so long as the letter is written in proper format. That is the reason to furnish the outline. A vet does not need to be rich enough to pay large sums of money for medical opinions. An obscure little known local doctors opinion just might carry more probative value than a well known frequent flier who is known for writing many IOMs.
just my 2 cents, you can look up my AO CONUS win and see how the judge respected my $30 IOMs
crippsbvadec.pdf the judge considered my IOMs as overwhelming.

John, if there is in existence in your medical records, results from the much more invasive test, an arteriogram, the arteriogram is the gold standard in preference of the EKG nuclear stress test. it carries much more probative value in a vet's claim.
 

I am at "M" +1k and have won hundreds of claims for other vets besides my own multiple claims. I have never paid more than a $30.00 copay for a IOM and never recommended that expense for anyone else. Any medical professional can write the opinion and therefore fulfill the requirement of the nexus without emptying the piggy bank so long as the letter is written in proper format. That is the reason to furnish the outline. A vet does not need to be rich enough to pay large sums of money for medical opinions. An obscure little known local doctors opinion just might carry more probative value than a well known frequent flier who is known for writing many IOMs.
just my 2 cents, you can look up my AO CONUS win and see how the judge respected my $30 IOMs
crippsbvadec.pdf the judge considered my IOMs as overwhelming.

John, type into your web browser
usva101.0rg
click on nexus letter, print the two page document.
Copy the case that I gave you in the above post. http://www.va.gov/vetapp14/Files6/1449192.txt Highlight the text pertaining to the doctors medical opinion in the case, therefore simplifying and saving your doctor's valuable time.
Take the copies to a private doctor and pay the co pay using your medicare if you have medicare coverage. If not, expect to pay about 80 to 100 bucks cash for a medical opinion. I have found that about 50% of the doctors will write an opinion if you ask and make it easy on them by furnishing an example,"outline", and another opinion close to what you are contending.
Ask the doc if he can concur with what the examiner in the BVA prior decision is saying. If so, ask if he will write you a letter complying to the nexus letter example that you are furnishing him from the usva101.org website. After filing the claim as a  FDC, for OSA sit back and wait on the C&P exam.
I am expecting a RO decision pretty soon for an increase in diabetes because my VA diabetic doc limited and regulated my activities.  So as not to muddy the waters with too many issues,  when I get that decision I intend to file on OSA as secondary to Diabetes related to AO exposure, heart disease and the prescribed medications thereof, using the exact evidence that I just handed to you.
Good luck to you old friend!
P.S. if you really want to hit a home run, get two medical opinions concurring. No problem if you have medicare part B to pick up the tab. Not a big expense if you don't.

I ran across this in m21-1 Part 3. According to this recently updated information a request for reconsideration is a viable choice at the regional level. 
Section F.  Requests for Reconsideration
1.  Requests for Reconsideration
  Introduction
This topic contains information on claims for reconsideration, including    ·   definition of a request for reconsideration ·   initial steps for handling a request for reconsideration ·   effective dates for requests for reconsideration of  increased evaluation ·   determining whether to include appeal rights in the decision notice, and ·   letter to a claimant who provides no evidence, or evidence VA has already considered, in support of a request for reconsideration.   Change Date
July 15, 2015   a.  Definition:  Request  for Reconsideration
For the purpose of this topic, a request for reconsideration is a request from a claimant for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to reconsider one of its decisions that has not yet become final (the one-year appeal period, which begins on the date the claimant was notified of the decision at issue, has not yet expired).  A prescribed form is notrequired for a request for reconsideration.   A request for reconsideration differs from a claim to reopen in that the decision at issue in a claim to reopen has become final.   Reference:  For more information about claims to reopen a finally denied claim, see M21-1, Part III, Subpart ii, 2.D.   b.  Initial Steps for Handling a Request  for Reconsideration
The table below describes the initial steps for handling a request for reconsideration   If the claimant submits ... Then ... evidence VA has never before considered refer the claim to either the rating activity or authorization activity (whichever made the decision at issue) for reconsideration. no evidence but makes reference to available evidence that VA has never before considered assist the claimant in obtaining the evidence.   Note:  Follow the applicable instructions in this table once VA receives the evidence.   Reference:  For information about assisting claimants in obtaining evidence to support their claim, see M21-1, Part III, Subpart iii, 1.C.1, 2, and 3. a statement indicating a  willingness to report for examination(s) after failing to report to a previously scheduled exam(s) reorder the missed examination(s). ·   no evidence, or ·   evidence VA has already considered send the claimant the letter shown in M21-1, Part III, Subpart ii, 2.F.1.e.  

Wow! I never expected so many people to respond in trying to help me with to my dilemma. I have read the BOD rule a thousand times over a ten year period.  I just did not give any weight to the phrase," OR ANY OTHER POINT". That is just what I needed guys. Thanks ever so much.
I asked for a DRO denovo review. It has only been five months since the date of the decision in question so the NOD will be timely filed. The RO says the quickest avenue is to reopen the claim. I don't want to do anything that will cause me to loose the considerable amount of four years retro, no matter how long it takes. Do I go with my gut feeling and request  a review or reopen as the RO suggest?

Thanks for the post, but I am still looking for the mandate that directs the VA rating authority to give to the veteran, no matter what the discrepancy, a ruling that is most favorable to the veteran. 
I have an "L" rating for loss of use, The VA then used 100% Heart Disease to get me the boost to "M", Now they want the 21-2680 to show that I need A&A for 100% Kidney disease. That would be hard to do because I am not on Dialysis yet. 
My contention is, The rater was correct in assigning the loss of use x 2 as an "L" rating. The rater then had a a choice  to make as to whether to use the 100% Heart disease or the 100% Kidney Disease for the boost to "M".
Had the rater chosen the Kidney Disease, instead of the Heart Disease, for the Boost to "M" That would leave the Heart Disease as an unused 100%award to become a basis for the need for A&A. That scenario would have given the most favorable outcome to the veteran.
How can I support my contention, by statute, that the VA is mandated in every incident, to give to the veteran the most advantageous ruling where there is an option to consider?
I have another thread open, but here in this thread, I am looking for a matter of law to support my contention.
asknod maybe?

I am sure that I have read this either in the 38 C.F.R or the 38 U.S.C.   A  mandate, that where there is an option, or choice, the VA is to choose the most favorable option in the best interest  of the veteran. Where can I find this mandate? I am looking in the C.F.R but I have not found it yet.
Thanks

Keep on keeping on Buck!

Its sort of a catch 22. I am highly appreciative for what I do get from the VA. Without the VA benefits I would for sure be in a world of hurt. In the process over the last ten years of trying to claim those benefits really took a toll on myself and my family. It should not have been that way. I now have my earned benefits but neither I or any veteran that I know of trust the VA in any circumstance. In private enterprise if you have no satisfied customers you don't survive. The VA has no satisfied customers that I know of, not even the ones who eventually win their claims. The lack of accountability of individual VA employees has created a monster of an organization that is hostile to the veteran that it is meant to serve.

You are required to show where you were exposed, in great detail. When you were exposed, in great detail. And how you were exposed, in great detail. If you are extremely tenacious and presistant you might have a chance. Be mindful, it will take years of your time. The benefits, should you happen to win, outweigh the effort of the fight for yourself and those who might follow in your footsteps. Go for it!

Keep on keeping on Buck!