New Conus Ao Claim Won

[jamescripps2]

I have in my hands the BVA decision, it is a new AO win @ Fort Gordon GA. dated Oct.17, 2012. When it is posted on the BVA web site it is DOCKET NO.10-06 183. We worked on the evidence and submitted the claim for DM II at the Nashville TN. RO four years ago.

Never give up,

James

[broncovet]

Congratulations! I take it "Conus" Is Continental United States.

[Bigred122]

I have in my hands the BVA decision, it is a new AO win @ Fort Gordon GA. dated Oct.17, 2012. When it is posted on the BVA web site it is DOCKET NO.10-06 183. We worked on the evidence and submitted the claim for DM II at the Nashville TN. RO four years ago.

Never give up,

James

That is great news! I need to look up the decision,I was at 3 locations where AO was used Fort lewis,Wa, Ft Gordon,Ga (pulled Guard duty in Sept 1971 at a beautiful park to keep everyone away on the weekends.First time with Georgia Moonshine in a beautiful lodge.One quart toasted 4 of us!!) and even got to play with AO in S. Korea.I was denied Korea exposure because I arrived in Korea 30 days after August 31,1971 deadline.So I guess the CAD,DmII, Graves Disease and a couple of other things are just my imagination!

[jamescripps2]

You are correct. "CONUS" is the Continental United States. Alaska and Hawaii are excluded from CONUS. There was one AO claim won by a vet whose duties and exposure was on on a golf course in Hawaii. There was also a AO exposure win at Fort Greeley Alaska and I know of several more Fort Greeley claims that are pending at this time.

This latest Fort Gordon win is only the fifth AO win inside CONUS to my knowledge. This win was for a National Guard officer who was at Fort Gordon for training. Not only did the win establish his medical care and compensation but it also established his veterans' status as a veteran. He was exposed to AO while on active duty for training purposes.

I expect that Berta will chime in on this one. There is also another extenuating factor in this claim, the Veteran did not arrive at Fort Gordon until seven days after the conceded defoliation testing at Fort Gordon. Can you see the inference in this win?

James

[jbasser]

Keep up the good work Jim. Can you come on the Show to discuss this one.

Basser

[Capt.]

Hello James, Thanks for your post and helping our Veterans community. I just wanted to post this environmental report from Fort Greely Restoration and Advirsory Board. Part of ADEC. In this report you will see undeniable evidence that Dioxins and Furans are being detected in the soil samples. It is a long read but you will also notice other very harmful COC s in the test analysis of several sites.

I am service connected from Fort Greely and moving ahead with the rest and am one of the very few to have a claim from Fort Greely awarded. Still the VA got it wrong but have to go thru the system.

Now this is evidence that says it is definitely in the soil, at Fort Greely, even though it has been 25 + years since the test in the 1990s . There are some other test I have but this one is long enough so please skip down to the following tables and read. CONCLUSIVE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.

This site is the real deal for finding any toxic site including the SM1A and pipeline used for dumping radioactive waste into Jarvis Creek at Fort Greely.

http://www.smdcen.us...minrecords.aspxhttp://www.smdcen.us...minrecords.aspx

After you go to this site then scroll down to this. It was too large to download

2002 Soil Evaluation and Risk Assessment Sites 85S 85N 133 112 Fort Greely Alaska Rev1 06Dec2002 Part 2 (15.8 MB)

Table 5-30 Dioxin Furan Anaylsis Fort Greely Five Training Pits

Table 5-230

Table 5-231

Table 5-232

Table 5-233

Table 18-1-18-7 Site 85 N Dioxins Sample Analyticals July 1998 21-22

Archiving this here at Hadit will allow others to see the scientific data that will be able to be used in the claims process. NEVER GIVE UP. God Bless, C.C.

Edited November 9, 2012 by Capt.Contaminate

[jamescripps2]

Consider the fact that Dioxin does not occur in nature, it is 100% man made.