Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules
RSG
-
Posts
323 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
VA Disability and Benefits Information
VA Benefits News
Store
Posts posted by RSG
-
-
I just downloaded that document today, thanks a bunch.Appeciate the help.
ron
RSG,these confirm dioxins on Treasure Island.
http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/tr...ting2.15.05.pdf
NAVAL STATION TREASURE ISLAND - (MAP)
LINK TO ASSOCIATED GEOTRACKER CASES
529 ACRES; BETWN SAN FRANCISCO & OAKLAND
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94130
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY
SITE TYPE: CLOSED BASE
ACRES: 550 ACRES
APN: NONE SPECIFIED
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST: NO
CLEANUP OVERSIGHT AGENCIES:
DTSC - SITE MITIGATION AND BROWNFIELD REUSE PROGRAM - LEAD<B&NBSP;< FONT>
PROJECT MANAGER: RYAN MIYA
SUPERVISOR: DANIEL MURPHY
DIVISION / BRANCH: OMF - NO (BERKELEY)
ENVIROSTOR ID: 38370044
SITE CODE: 201210
ASSEMBLY DISTRICT: 13
SENATE DISTRICT: 03
SPECIAL PROGRAM:
FUNDING: BRAC 93
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SPECIALIST: RICHARD PERRY
PRESS CONTACT: ANGELA BLANCHETTE
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
Cleanup Status
ACTIVE AS OF 1/1/1991
Regulatory Profile VIEW DETAILED AREA / SUB-AREA REPORT
PAST USE(S) THAT CAUSED CONTAMINATION
DRY CLEANING, FIRE TRAINING AREAS, FUEL - AIRCRAFT STORAGE/ REFUELING, FUEL - VEHICLE STORAGE/ REFUELING, FUEL TERMINALS, ILLEGAL DUMPING, LAUNDRY SERVICES, OIL/WATER SEPARATORS, PAINT/DEPAINT FACILITY, SCHOOL - OTHER, WASTE - SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
POTENTIAL CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN
SLUDGE - PAINT - CONFIRMED
UNSPECIFIED OIL CONTAINING WASTE - CONFIRMED
BENZENE - CONFIRMED
DIOXIN (AS 2,3,7,8-TCDD TEQ) - CONFIRMED
LEAD - CONFIRMED
METHANE - CONFIRMED
POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCBS) - CONFIRMED
POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS (PAHS) - CONFIRMED
RADIOACTIVE ISOTOPES - CONFIRMED
TETRACHLOROETHYLENE (PCE) - CONFIRMED
TPH-DIESEL - CONFIRMED
TPH-GAS - CONFIRMED
TPH-MOTOR OIL - CONFIRMED
TRICHLOROETHYLENE (TCE) - CONFIRMED
VINYL CHLORIDE - CONFIRMED
CUMENE (ISOPROPYLBENZENE) - CONFIRMED<B&NBSP;< FONT>
POTENTIAL MEDIA AFFECTED
INDOOR AIR, OTHER GROUNDWATER AFFECTED (USES OTHER THAN DRINKING WATER), SEDIMENTS, SOIL, SOIL VAPOR
Source: http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/p...bal_id=38370044
-
In my case my exams show I was 100% healthy.
Tnx,R
I have seen several that were lost at the BVA level due to medical problems that existed prior to military service. You are considered 100% healthy when you enter military service EXCEPT for the health problems that are listed on your entry exam. The key to winning this type of claim is proving that your military service aggrivated your pre-service condition. -
Thank you,
That all helps.
R
-
Are there any claims that have been won or lost that made reference to mental health prior to enlistment. Case law that points to not being able to use evidence such as that prior to enlistment. I thought that it was presumptive that a person
at enlistment and being accepted for military duty was 100% healthy and able.
-
Hi Berta,
Yes, as noted by each letter, is their name title and location. That is correct about the denial. I had a PTSD claim but was advised to drop both the PTSD and Chemical exposure. So that now has nothing to do with this case. It is now for the depression/bipolar disorder. They have not given anything with reference to the lastest letters i posted. I posted the letter from AMC further down in the posting. Maybe that might help.
Ron
Your evidence that they listed-if it came from VA MHC psychologists or psychiatrists- should certainly obliterate the childhood stuff-and be persuasive to the VA-
I interpreted that they only mentioned that all due to the 1969 denial.
They often mention an older decision in a SOC-it usually has nothing to do with what the newer decision involves-
I dont see how they could still raise that specific 1969 situation as the only reason they denied in this decision.
They had to give a full rationale or Reason for rejecting the opinions you had from VA doctors.
I would think that is more to what you got then what you posted here.
because this all just doesnt make sense to me.
Is there something in those SSA records that might be causing them to deny your claim?
Like the reason SSA used for your depression?
I seem to have a disconnect here- with your situation-and this is my fault and not yours-I consider the exact wording of BVA remands to get the keys to why the claim is being denied. So I hope others will step up here and try to see why the VA is denying your claim.
-
They have no valid reason for doing this,, from what I have read. Maybe I am missing something.
But the statement about my trip to the shrink when I was a kid is all they keep saying.
this is just making me nuts. And more and more depressed. They wonder why so many vets commit suicide. They just keep screwing with their heads. There is no more to it than what I have posted here. At least nothing more than what I have found. There is no other reason that I have found in any of their letters,from the VRO,BVA,or AMC. This is all they ever refer to. I am sorry, but should I be looking for something else specific.
R
-
It is the DAV in Boise. don't kno if I should mention names. But initials are B.A. I have written, Sali,
Craig, and McCain, trying to acheive closure. The case is at AMC. See appeals management center.
-
Under "These statements are correct,"
there are doctor's opinions that the AMC considered.
Can you tell us exactly why-(except for the reference to the 1969 denial)
why they denied the claim?
Decision: Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disorder other than post traumatic disorder, to include a depressive disorder and a bipolar disorder is not established.
The above statement is what they keep telling me.
The only thing that they keep denying me for is the prexisting psychological disorder, the shrink visit
at 5 yrs. old.
Did they question the expertise of the doctors you provided opinions from?
meaning were they psychologists or psychiatrists-fully capable of assessing your disability?
The AMC did not specify, They had to be qualified. The majority of the Doc's are VA/MHC Dr's.
Or did they question your nexus to service for the depression.
Not yet, what I posted is what they have given me.
I explained what the nexus means in 2 other replies to you.
Did those letters from the VA/MHC doctors,not provide the required Nexus?
The VA in a SSOC like this must give a full rationale as to why the claim remains denied.(It sounds like a SSOC - I am not sure that it is)
This letter is another SSOC letter, The cover letter says this:
Dear Mr. R:
Enclosed is a "Supplemental Statement of the Case" (SSOC). It is not a decision on any new issues, but is intended to inform you of any material changes in, or additions to, the information contained in the "Statement of the Case" (SOC) that we previously sent to you. The following information will help you decide how to respond. We encourage you to discuss this with your representative, if you have one.
Your appeal was previously remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals ("Board") for further development, which has been completed. Before returning your appeal to the Board we are giving you a period of time to respond with additional comments or evidence. Please note that a response at this time is optional and is not required to continue your appeal.
If you wish to respond, you have 60 days from the date of this letter to respond (or 30days if this is a "simultaneously contested claim"). There is no special form to use. You can simply write to us and tell us in your own words what you disagree with in this SSOC and why.
If you do not wish to respond, and you do not want us to wait for the 60 days
to expire, you can write to us and let us know that. If you do not respond, the Board will considerwhat you have already submitted in deciding your appeal.
We hope that the above information is helpful. Sincerely yours,
A. Russo
Director, Appeals Management Center
I assume they also gave you a deadline to respond to this letter? And with specific evidence they still need?
If they did-how much time is left for you to respond to this? approximately 4 5 weeks is left.
Or did they say they have sent this back to the BVA or the RO? No it is staying at the AMC as far as I know.
I am sorry that I may not understand what you are asking sometimes, but the Coginitive disorder described by the SSD doctors may be disturbing my abilities to comprehend whatyou are asking.
-
my c file must be really huge also. I originally filed for this in 1969, and have been denied since.
This really bum's me. Really really bad. they wonder why I have I have issues.
R
-
hi Betty,
Yes, this is the second SSOC from AMC, the first was from BVA, that i've received, These letters I showed you, are the second set and they are very recent, and I am planning on sending an IMO and show the AMC they already have in there possesion the evidence that disproves any psychological disorders.
There is no other depressive disorder and bipolar. This is the only one they are referring to. My childhood visit to the shrink. I personally feel thet the only reason they won't approve this is because they don't want to pay me
or take care of my Depressive disorders. I have also been told that this is a personality disorder. I don't think so.
Ron
-
I have done max mounts of the eveidence thing also, after 38 years fightin these jerks.
-
they had letters from earlier requests at the BVA, Both Civilian and SSD. No VA, These are most recent
3 months ago.
-
disregard.
-
Disregard
-
Hi Betty,
No I have not received a denial, It was remanded to the AMC from the VRO In Washington DC, about 5 months ago from the
BVA. The first info I received from them was a request for Dr.s, laymens, family, and SSD statements. I returned those. The letter i received 2 weeks ago said this: Decision: Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disorder other than
post traumatic disorder, to include a depressive disorder and a bipolar disorder is not established.
What follows Is the Reasons and bases;
VA letter of 7-7-07 provided additional notification of evidence required to substantiate the claim.
This next statement is wrong. I have this documentation. this is the exam when I was 5.
Service medical records showed depression. Physical Evaluation Board report showed the disability existed prior to service. There was a history of pre-service psychiatric treatment.
Service connection was denied for depressive reaction in rating decision dated 6-3-69 based on a finding that the disability pre-existed service and was not aggravated by service.
These statements are correct,
Social Security decision dated 10-24-02 showed disability for Social Security purposes from 4-10-02. Primary diagnosis of major depressive disorder. Secondary diagnosis was: cognitive disorder.
Letter from D. Fell, LMSW, the Vet Center, dated 11-1-07 noted the veteran's report that the symptoms began during his time on active duty. Diagnoses were PTSD and major depression.
Letter from VA/MHC, D. Blake, Ph.D. dated 11-1-07 showed depression and agitation. Dr. Blake noted that the veteran's in-service traumatic events were of sufficient magnitude to produce symptoms of PTSD and depression. Dr. Blake opined that it was more likely than not that Mr. Graham's long history of psychiatric disorder began with these events.
Letter from K. Khatain, M.D., VA/VET CenterMHC dated 11-6-07 reported that the veteran's mood disorder was likely related to service, at least in part.
Letter from M. Weiss, M.D. Civilian, dated 10-29-07 showed diagnoses of major depression and posttraumatic stress disorder.
Lay statement from T. Warner dated November 2007 reported that the veteran had symptoms including anger, depression, and suicidal tendencies.
Lay statement from veteran's parents reported that the veteran had a normal childhood, but had difficulty holding a job after discharge from the service.
Lay statement from veteran's son reported that it was difficult to communicate with his father. He reported that the veteran seemed depressed, withdrawn, and incapable of focusing on his jobs.
These letters above are the most recent: These last letters are what the AMC requested. please tell me what you think.
Thanks, Betty
Ron,
I haven't figured out if you have received a denial from the AMC or if your claim has been remanded recently to the AMC.
Betty
-
What I hope, and this maybe just a fantasy, Is that the reason my claim has been remanded, and ended up there, is tha the BVA relized there were a bunch of errors, on The VRO's part. and the AMC just keeps asking for more info so they will grant my claim, and they have done what they can to CYA. I think there are so many blatant errors on the VRO's part that hey had to go thru the BVA, the Washington DC.,VRO, (instead of sending it back Boise VRO) then being remanded to AMC for them to do the right thing.. that's what I hope anyway.
Tnx Ron
-
This may be a really stupid question.
What is the function of the Appeals Management Center. I am hoping an explanation of their function will help me understand,
what my claim is doing there.
Tnx
R
-
i can't get this link to work, I would like to view what was said.
tnx, r
-
they say exactly the same thing in my SMR's, where I was, how long I was in there, what I was medicated with and what I was diagnosed with. It say's exactly this in my SMR's, Diagnoses : depression agitated. Signed by the treating Officer. I have everything from day one. I will check my c file when it arrives, but I am positive about what it say's. i must have read the
thing dozens of times. trying to figure out what I've been doing wrong with this claim.
R
Well when you get your c-file look for references to a personality disorder. If the VA believes you have a personality disorder that could explain the pre-existing disorder thing. If you were diagnosed with a psychotic depression and put in the hospital while in the service I don't know how they can wriggle out of service connecting you. What do your hospital records say regarding your diagnosis? If it says major depression and you were in for three months I don't see how they can say service did not aggravate or precipitate your breakdown. What do your SMR's say about your depression? Do you have those records? -
I will do so. thanks.
R
It would be best to remove the Dr.'s name and any personally identifying remarks from them. -
I will scan the last three I received. i will post later, should I remove the letterhead and so forth.
Ron
RSG,I think it would be a good idea to post some of these Dr's letters. Some times the doctors use terminology that the raters do not understand. Also, some doctors write opinions with no logic supporting the opinion. This could pose a problem.
-
No i don't think so, because it did not occur until 2002 and ssd retired me. I've lost the abilities to do my job because of six
or seven strokes. They did say that I did have a "personality disorder" in an C&P industrial & something exam, and maybe when I was on the VAH/MHC ward for a week, because of this depression, but that was only once. Don't think that would matter would It? It's never been mentioned other than that one time. That I remember anyway.
ron
I wonder if they are not trying to lay the whole thing on the cognitive disorder. Did the cognitive disorder pre-exist service? The VA may try and blame your depression and everything else on some constitutional abnormality. They do this all the time under various guises. They usually say you have a personality disorder. Just about everyone here was diagnosed with a PD at one time or other. -
Thanks.
Ron
-
So all I may need is my explaination of the causes, is that correct.
Thanks
No Stressor Letter required for depression.At least that has been my experience in the people I know that have received comp for it.
Chemical Exposure & Other Maladies
in VA Disability Claims Research
Posted
The navy has admitted and is is now written. All the toxic waste I said was at TI has been confirmed,
Including Dioxins, Furans all the other is as I said it was. I sent the VA 300 (navy documentation)
plus pages, and will do so again. I appreciate any info you people out there can provide. I have a bunch of illness that can be linked to chemical exposure. Thanks.