Blue Water Navy And Ao

[john999]

I heard on the news today that a blue water navy vet who was offshore of Vietnam had his DMII claim accepted based on the exposure to AO. Some federal judge made the ruling. It should be in the newspaper or at VAwatchdog soon with more details. I did not think I would live to see that. Maybe some more conditions will be added to the presumptive list if their is a liberalizing mood for AO victims.

[Berta]

John- I posted the CAVC ruling yesterday-

Alex predicted this might come-

Mike Harris (our former member) correctly assessed that the VA will appeal this-

I bet they do too- however this is A VICTORY!!!!!!!!

Regardless of what the VA does, this is victory- BTW Blue Water vets have a great web site-

Next to Nehmer and the VCAA I think this is one of the most important decisions anyone has ever made for veterans.

I know I focus on AO vets a lot- not meant to leave all other vets out-

The VCAA was for every single vet and widow with a claim in process since 2000 enactment date-

and the VA itself has already screwed all that up-

Maybe in this AO Navy situation they will do the right thing.

[evandc]

Berta,

I have noticed also that everyone encourges Blue Water Navy to file quickly. The VA will fight this & you never know.

I saw the following from Hugh Cox on the VA Watchdog site:

NOTE from Larry Scott: Hugh added the following sentence to his original analysis and it's very important ... "The VA can be expected to appeal this case and to lobby Congress to retroactively apply the “set foot” requirement. Veterans who can take advantage of the facts and circumstances of this case should do so immediately before new VA regulations are promulgated and before Congress acts."

Don

[john999]

Berta

You know the VA is going to hate having the "boots on the ground" theory overturned. Now this could add thousands of more presumptive claims. All those Aircraft Carriers offshore of Vietnam and the personnel might be able to file claims. Now I wonder about all the Air Force members who flew missions over Vietnam and the ground crews. The VBM says that one of the more likely diseases to be added as presumptive are the emotional disorders and the neuropathies.

[evandc]

John,

In below post you said " The VBM says that one of the more likely diseases to be added as presumptive are the emotional disorders and the neuropathies." Do you have URL or site where I could read more about this subject? I already have 100% for PTSD & 100% for Prostate Cancer. I have Neuropathy in both feet, so I'm interested in that info.

Thanks,

Don Evans

[john999]

Evandc

I got the information from the Veterans Benefits Manual. This is a referrence guide for advocates. What the VBM was saying is that in the future neuropathies are more likely to be added to the presumptive list of AO. They did not mention a time frame so I don't know how long we have to wait.

[Berta]

John is correct Don- I have the 2005 edition right here-(VBM- NVLSP)

I think an exposed veteran- should claim AO regardless of what disability they have-

What I mean is -say a vet has heart disease, served in Nam, does not have DMII nor any other etiology for the heart disease-

The vet can say they had HBP in service, maybe get a paper trail from records,

have private docs who treated them soon after service, etc etc--

This vet should state in her claim, that not only did she exhibit signs of heart disease in her SMRs consistent with initial manifestations of athersclerosisand heart disease , she claims exposure to Agent Orange while serving as MASH nurse in Qui Nohn province , and the MASH unit and helo pad had been set up in an unnatural clearing of an apparent large jungle area that had been completely defoilated by Agent Orange in abpout spring, 1967.

(She could add her experience as a nurse renders her medical opinion as valid-but the VA does not seem to value an opinion of a professional if they themselves are the claimant)-

This vet can retain her EED on the AO , for any eventual SC of heart disease directly due to AO-