Jump to content

Ask Your VA   Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
 Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • homepage-banner-2024.png

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Ao Blue Waters Sue Secretary Shinseki

Rate this question


Berta

Question

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/august032013/blue-water-suit-jpr.php

The Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Association, (BWNVVA) (our president John Rossie has done many SVR shows here as well as Commander Wells too, I think , who is the attorney quoted below) and Military-Veterans Advocacy (MVA) , have sued Eric Shinseki.

Blue Water Navy Veterans Sue Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki for Failure to Grant Disability Benefits

In part:

“Attorney John Wells, who brought the suit, is a retired Navy Commander and served as Chief Engineer on three Navy ships. “I am very familiar with the naval operations at the time and the distillation equipment that enriched the dioxin.” Wells said. “We have taken this evidence to two separate committees of the Institute of Medicine, and they agree that the distillation process, based on Henry’s law of thermodynamics, would have co-distilled and enriched the dioxin. This confirmed an earlier study by the University of Queensland.” Wells is the Executive Director of MVA and previously serves as Director of Legal and Legislative Affairs for the BWNVVA. After retiring as a surface warfare officer he opened a law practice in Slidell Louisiana with emphasis on military and veterans law. “

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 22
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

This will be the NEXT NEHMER, for blue water Veterans. All blue water Veterans should file a claim for any conditions you currently have a diagnosis for all presumptive conditions having to do with Agent Orange exposure. You will be denied for now but when the legislation goes through it will be another Nehmer and the retroactive date will most likely be based on the date the origianl claim was reevied. Or one year prior to date the legislation goes into effect if the Veteran had a diagnosis of the condition and did not file a claim. Or the date of claim based on a new diagnosis.

Berta, is well versed in NEHMER action and she knows it will be a while before this goes through. In my opinion, I think it will based on the studies they are referencing. The problem is it could take years for this to pass, and many Veterans could pass away from AO related inllnesses before this happens, BUT, file your claims now anyway and consider it safe keeping for your wife, children or decedents. Alot of Nehmer funds were send to wife and children of deceased Veterans.

I know this is not a pleasant topic, but it needs to be addressed, Blue Water Vets file your claims! and think of it as a long term investment for your family.- jmo

Ps- VA keeps adding more and more ships to the AO exposure list. The list is updated monthly as Veterans provide research material and their own personal military records to support the fact they suffer from AO exposure. This happens because Vets are helping Vets and they are not giving up. Fight the good fight, you will previal in , if not for yourself then for others, keep pushing on.

Edited by harleyman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • In Memoriam

I have filed claims for blue water ao in 2005. I was on an A/C carrier. These guys don't want to give benefits to men that were on A/C carriers regardless of wheather they were exposed or not. There are 5000 men on each Carrier that was in the Gulf of Tonkin. I have seen many of my buddies die of cancer. The rest of us are filled with vascular stents. They don't seem to care at all.

We will see what Commander Wells can do. I have listened to him many times in congressional hearings. I hope that John Rossi can hang in there.

Stretch

Just readin the mail

 

Excerpt from the 'Declaration of Independence'

 

We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder

I have filed claims for blue water ao in 2005. I was on an A/C carrier. These guys don't want to give benefits to men that were on A/C carriers regardless of wheather they were exposed or not. There are 5000 men on each Carrier that was in the Gulf of Tonkin. I have seen many of my buddies die of cancer. The rest of us are filled with vascular stents. They don't seem to care at all.

We will see what Commander Wells can do. I have listened to him many times in congressional hearings. I hope that John Rossi can hang in there.

We all know that the VA cares more about the VA than veterans. The reasons are legion.

A "brown water" ship that I was assigned to had veteran's claims denied, due to an incorrect statement in the Navy's ships history web site. The error was a statement that the particular ship was not in Vietnam waters during a period that it made several inshore trips, and docking at various ports in Vietnam. We had to get copies of the deck logs, convince the Navy to change the web site history, and get the VA to change it's decisions. Each veteran had to refile. The ship is now on the presumptive list, by name, by type, and by the whole squadron, including administrative REMFs that seldom went to sea, let alone Vietnam. I guess the VA doesn't want to go through that again! The sad part was that the deck logs were and are available to the VA if and when they bother to request them. The real driver for the correction effort was a particular veteran's claim. Seems he had almost the full gamut of A/O exposure symptoms and diseases that were disabling and likely to be terminal in just a few years.

Carriers had search and rescue teams and choppers. It's my understanding that the chopper pilots were considered to have presumptive A/O exposure, and not the crewmen, including the rescue specialist that went down the cable to collect the downed airman. Wish someone can clarify or correct this, as I only have hearsay, and cannot currently find any specific written information on this.

To add insult to injury - - Treasure Island Navy Base was/is a "Superfund Site" with Dioxin as one of the contaminants. The Fire Fighting School was the primary location. A great number of junior enlisted sailors were sent to T.I. for outfitting, training, and transfer to the far east, including Vietnam and other countries, as well as ships operating in the far east. Part of the "refresher training" involved fighting fires and exposure to smoke and fumes from a fire in enclosed areas that simulated compartments on a ship. The fuel for the fires seems to be the source of the dioxin contamination. It was basically fuel that was not considered suitable for shipboard or other use. So thousands of sailors were likely exposed to Dioxin before they ever left the US.

The VA is likely to say that the presumptive bit applies only to A/O, not the contaminants in A/O.

Edited by Chuck75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • In Memoriam

I went through several fire fighting schools. The one in San Diego was a room filled with (on fire) smoking oil, and we were pushed into the room and would sweep the oil back and forth to flush fire out the other portals. These schools are all in my records.

In Viet Nam our A/C flew over Vietnam and brought back AO. We did not have water to clean the aircraft so we had to use waterless cleaner. We used our hands and rags to clean the entire A/C many times during VN. I had several growths cut off of my hands and these were entered into my SMC. I didn't have any strange growths before service. They just don't give a crap.

That is why Commander Wells and John Rossi must win.

Stretch

Just readin the mail

 

Excerpt from the 'Declaration of Independence'

 

We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally don't see this going anywhere or IF ever very far down the road when there a few left to benefit. The supposed numbers just do not show that Navy personal have an out of whack to the general public in cases of DBll, and heart disease or cancer. He is going to have to use that they do and that is going to be very hard when the numbers are not there.

We all know that the Army and Marine boots on ground had supporting evidence by the numbers to show that DBll and a lot of the presumptive were more prevalent in the boots on ground veterans that served in Vietnam than the Vietnam era vets that did not serve in country.

Brings in mind that old saying numbers don't lie.

Stillhere

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The gear used in many of the older Fire Fighting schools contained asbestos.

The older ships contained asbestos. A vet I tried to help ( he died with no dependents) had a disability that could have been strongly associated with asbestos and he had spent years on board ships.

Not only is the AO situation for BWVs serious, I bet many might have asbestos related disabilities too.

I researched the above vet's ship and found it had been sent to Iran long ago as salvage. It contained too much asbestos to even consider refurbishing it.

John Wells was on Fox news briefly a few weeks ago...he appears on Fox from time to time, and didn't mention this suit because I guess it had not officially been filed yet.

The AO ships list grew in great part,as Harleyman said, due to the efforts of BW veterans themselves,researching and presenting probative evidence to the VA.

Nehmer arose from the case of one widow ,Beverly Nehmer.

The AO Thailand vets now have AO regulations due to one hadit member, Kurt Priessman.

Precedent setting CAVC decisions always arise from the case of only one veteran or widow.

Blue Water vets have made a strong collective effort to continue to alter the AO Ships list , which used to be non existent.

Sometimes it takes a village.

Edited by Berta

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • RICHKAY earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • pacmanx1 earned a badge
      Great Content
    • czqiang1079 earned a badge
      First Post
    • Vicdamon12 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Panther8151 earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Our picks

    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
    • Welcome to hadit!  

          There are certain rules about community care reimbursement, and I have no idea if you met them or not.  Try reading this:

      https://www.va.gov/resources/getting-emergency-care-at-non-va-facilities/

         However, (and I have no idea of knowing whether or not you would likely succeed) Im unsure of why you seem to be so adamant against getting an increase in disability compensation.  

         When I buy stuff, say at Kroger, or pay bills, I have never had anyone say, "Wait!  Is this money from disability compensation, or did you earn it working at a regular job?"  Not once.  Thus, if you did get an increase, likely you would have no trouble paying this with the increase compensation.  

          However, there are many false rumors out there that suggest if you apply for an increase, the VA will reduce your benefits instead.  

      That rumor is false but I do hear people tell Veterans that a lot.  There are strict rules VA has to reduce you and, NOT ONE of those rules have anything to do with applying for an increase.  

      Yes, the VA can reduce your benefits, but generally only when your condition has "actually improved" under ordinary conditions of life.  

          Unless you contacted the VA within 72 hours of your medical treatment, you may not be eligible for reimbursement, or at least that is how I read the link, I posted above. Here are SOME of the rules the VA must comply with in order to reduce your compensation benefits:

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.344

       
    • Good question.   

          Maybe I can clear it up.  

          The spouse is eligible for DIC if you die of a SC condition OR any condition if you are P and T for 10 years or more.  (my paraphrase).  

      More here:

      Source:

      https://www.va.gov/disability/dependency-indemnity-compensation/

      NOTE:   TO PROVE CAUSE OF DEATH WILL LIKELY REQUIRE AN AUTOPSY.  This means if you die of a SC condtion, your spouse would need to do an autopsy to prove cause of death to be from a SC condtiond.    If you were P and T for 10 full years, then the cause of death may not matter so much. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use