hypertension Recently Got Decision On Nod

[Computer Tech]

In Feb of 2008 I filed a claim with the VA for CAD, hypertension, diabetes, glaucoma and arthritis bilateral feet, I also requested an increase for my knees both of which were rated at 0%. In Oct 2008 I received their decision, they did increase my left knee to 10% but left my right knee at 0% and the denied sc for everything else. The diabetes and glaucoma denied because I was stationed at Korat RTAFB in Thailand and not in Vietnam and every one knows that herbicides were never used in Thailand. I worked at the Korat AutoDin Computer center which was on the perimeter of Camp Friendship. In Oct 2009 I filled a NOD on my knees citing pain my ankles and screwed up by asking them to reopen my claim for diabetes and glaucoma due to exposure to herbicides and arthritis. With my NOD I sent the Thailand Checo report, the mission statement, pictures showing that the area around the computer center was brown and barren including a picture taken out the back door showing that not only was the area brown and barren but also that we were close to the perimeter, I also sent a buddy letter stating the computer center was close to the perimeter and the area surrounding the building was brown. I also enclosed a letter from my doctor stating that it was possible that the problems with my knees caused me to develop arthritis of the feet. n Nov 2009 after they added IHD I sent a letter asking them to reopen my CAD claim and consider it IHD supported by the evidence submitted in Oct. Early this month I received their decision on the hypertension, arthritis, ankle pain, diabetes and glaucoma, they denied service connection on everything saying that no new evidence had not been submitted which means that they ignored everything I had submitted in support of my claim. They're still saying that herbicides were not used in Thailand despite the evidence and despite the VA admitting this past May that herbicides were used on the perimeter of the bases and the computer center where I worked was on the perimeter. The decision was made by the San Diego RO rather than the Los Angeles RO where I had sent it to, also I haven't received a decision on the IHD or my knees but after the latest decision I'm expecting to be denied sc for IHD. I plan to see the county VSO either this week or next,. I would appreciate some advice on where to go with this besides filing another NOD which I intend to do and appealing the decision.

rating decision part 1.PDF

rating decision part 2.PDF

[halos2]

Go BVA file next. Talk to your VSO if denied at NOD then file form 9. Hopefully your VSO can examine you evidence to see what you are missing or are not sending. Physician Independent Exams may help but need to relate to condition and be in-service connected.

[Philip Rogers]

Please, please, please, keep appealing!!! VA claims are about "work product" and not accuracy. Work product is about moving your claim from the in-box to the out-box, not about accuracy. They get paid based on work product. You will win, eventually!!!!!!!!!!!! Never give up, please!!!!!!!!!!

pr

[Berta]

Did they mention the CHECO report as evidence?

Did they consider the buddy statement at all?

Did you send them this May directive as to AO Thailand? The link is in the discussion here:

[Berta]

I hope your VSO has the 2010 edition of the VBM and could send them a copy of page 218.

Due to Kurt Priessman's relentless work NVLSP has a new brief section on what Thailand vets the VA will conceded exposure for and states that any vet whose MOS put them on base perimeter duty "would be give special consideration -------"

I am outraged by this decision.

I feel your VSO should immediately ask them to CUE themselves on this decision. and to reconsider it based on the evidence they have ignored,(and attach that evidence and the buddy statements again) and refer them directly to the actual directive they should have ( he should enclose a copy of it and if he has the 2010 edition of the VBM he should refer to NVLSP and also enclose a copy of page 218, Chapter 3 "Agent Orange Exposure in Thailand."

He should also ask them to reconsider this decision too-

"I also enclosed a letter from my doctor stating that it was possible that the problems with my knees caused me to develop arthritis of the feet. n Nov 2009 after they added IHD I sent a letter asking them to reopen my CAD claim and consider it IHD supported by the evidence submitted in Oct."

However I suggest that you check out the topic here under the IMO forum ,"Getting an IMO" as 'it is possible'

wont do it- If the doc could state " it is at least as likely as not" with a medical rationale statement of support -then that would do it.

"n Nov 2009 after they added IHD I sent a letter asking them to reopen my CAD claim and consider it IHD supported by the evidence submitted in Oct. Early this month I received their decision on the hypertension, arthritis, ankle pain, diabetes and glaucoma, they den"...................

I assume the CAD claim was denied and is not in any appellate status.

I also suggest that you go to

http://www.nvlsp.org/Information/ArticleLibrary/AgentOrange/AO-RevisedAORelatedDiseases0610.htm

And fill out and send them the email information they need. They are compiling database to make sure anyone who was denied for IHD or any new presumptive in the past, who can prove exposure to AO, will receive their proper retroactive payment under the Nehmer Class Action case (which they won for vets and widows)

Mark your calender for the NOD cut off date (one year after the decision)but I feel if the VSO gets aggressive enough with the Directive and the NVLSP statement,and the evidence they ignored - this might turn around sooner than later-

I also suggest that the response should be made to the VARO of jurisdiction as well as to the VARO they farmed this out to- and put attention to: and then the initials of the rater that appear in the VARO codes in the upper right hand corner of the decision.

I am beyond outrage when they do this stuff.

There could also be a VCAA violation in the VCAA letter you got. The VSo should check that out too.

Did they send you a VCAA response form with that specific letter?

[Computer Tech]

halos2 & Philip: I plan to appeal this but I also want to see what they decide on the CAD/IHD because if they deny the IHD I want to appeal everything at one time.

Berta: They did not mention the CHECO report or the buddy letter as evidence. I attached the denial in my first posting of this thread. I think that they made their decision before May and didn't reconsider it after the directive came out. I've got that directive saved on my computer. I was a computer tech but we were located on the perimeter of Camp Friendship which was next to Korat airbase, we weren't outside all day but did spend time out back burning classified documents in the incinerator which meant stirring up the dust.

I had a feeling that the letter from the doctor wasn't strong enough, I have an appointment with her next week and will see if she can give me a stronger statement. On the CAD and IHD claims I haven't heard anything yet but they can only grant one or the other and I can't connect the CAD to my service. If they grant me service connection for the IHD that means they're conceding that I was more like than not exposed to herbicides at Korat which means that their decision on the diabetes and glaucoma is in error. I got a VCAA response form with all of the letters they sent about the claims. One thing they did point out is that glaucoma isn't one of the diseases associated with AO exposure which is true but it should be considered secondary to diabetes. I'll do the other things that you've suggested including the NVLSP.

Thanks again for all of the advice and suggestions.

[Computer Tech]

Berta

Just to let you know I sent that email to the NVLSP on the IHD claim and told them that I was a Thailand vet that worked on the perimeter.

Thanks again for your advice and suggestions.