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 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

How Do I File A Foia Request For Herbicide Use With Dod

Rate this question


AmicusBrief

Question

I'm trying to get DA 2785R and DD 1532 forms from 1973-75 used for herbicide application at Sierra Army Depot. They routinely sprayed the perimeter of the nuclear weapons storage areas to kill plant growth around the fences. The overspray would blow into the area and mist on everything. I understand they had to record the application under EPA rules. The herbicide training manual posted on the site shows that an individual was trained in the requirements in 1973. How do I get my hands on the required reports?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 6
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

6 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Check this link...Hope it helps you:

http://www.foia.gov/report-makerequest.html

LC

"I ADVISE & ENJOIN THOSE WHO DIRECT THIS WEBSITE IN THE TOMORROWS NEVER TO ADVOCATE ANY CAUSE FOR PERSONAL PROFIT OR PREFERMENT. I WOULD WISH IT ALWAYS TO BE 'THE TOCSIN' & TO DEVOTE ITSELF TO THE POLICIES OF EQUALITY & INJUSTICE TO THE UNDERPRIVILEGED.

IF THIS WEBSITE SHOULD AT ANYTIME BE THE VOICE OF SELF-INTEREST OR BECOME THE SPOKESMAN OF PRIVILEGE OR SELFISHNESS IT WOULD BE UNTRUE TO ITS HISTORY."

God Bless you all and Good Luck.

LOOSE CANNON

For Real Solutions For Positive Change Visit http://www.veteranwarriors1.com/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I knew something was up back then. Aside from the spray on the exclusion areas we were receiving all the chemical shipments coming back from VN, Okinawa, and the rest of the Pacific theater. Many of the containers were corroded and leaking as well as mislabeled. I finally found documentation of this and TCE contamination of the ground water there. The document also mentions storage and processing of over 100,000 lbs of DDT as well as 1500 tons of "retrograde chemicals". The list encompasses 185 items (still trying to get the list) deemed hazardous. AO is specifically excepted but no mention is made of White or Blue. Several other areas are also mentioned in the report. The document is here:

http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/910096MY.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Index=1976+Thru+1980&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5Czyfiles%5CIndex%20Data%5C76thru80%5CTxt%5C00000011%5C910096MY.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anonymous&SortMethod=h%7C-&MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0&ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&Display=p%7Cf&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Results%20page&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=1&SeekPage=x&ZyPURL

Edited by AmicusBrief
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  • HadIt.com Elder

The Army had some crazy E-7 drink AO to prove it was harmless. Needless to say that guy is dead. I know a vet who says he helped bury AO on Okinawa. Is there proof of this if you know? He never had boots on the ground in Nam so you have to prove the exposure. We will all die from AO one day. If you don't get hit by a beer truck AO will probably kill you. Me too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Darn I know of the applications of the products at MCAS (H) Tustin down loaded the material and used it in my claims. But somehow it never was even addressed by the VA.

Prior to 1942, the Site, neighboring the Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin Parcels and surrounding properties adjacent to MCAS Tustin were used for agricultural cultivation (EDR, 2007). As part of the agricultural activities, pesticides and herbicides were applied to the Site (Finding of Suitability to Transfer [FOST 2], 2001).

In 1942 the MCAS Tustin was constructed on neighboring parcels to the east. However, agricultural activities continued to be conducted on the Site until approximately 1968. In 1996, laboratory analysis of soil samples collected from areas to the west and northeast of the Site (Neighborhoods E and G) revealed dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), dichlorodiphenyldichloroethene (DDE), dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane (DDD), alpha-chlordane, dieldrin, endosulfan II, gamma-chlordane, methoxychlor and metals above the laboratory detection limits

(FOST 2, 2001).

In 1996, laboratory analysis of soil samples collected between 1-foot and 11-feet below ground surface from two borings advanced on Agricultural Area I (Parcel 6, approximately 50 acres) revealed DDE up to 7 micrograms per kilogram (ug/kg) and DDT up to 5 ug/kg in the 1-foot samples, which are below the 2005 California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHSLs) levels for residential use of 1,700 ug/kg. In addition, laboratory analysis of soil samples collected between 1-foot and 12-feet below ground surface from 9 borings advanced on Agricultural Area II (greater than

100 acres) revealed DDD up to 5 ug/kg, DDE up to 73 ug/kg, DDT up to 130 ug/kg, chlordane up to 0.88 ug/kg, dieldrin up to 4.3 ug/kg, endosulfan up to 38 ug/kg and methoxychlor up to 27 ug/kg (BNI, 1996).

In 2001, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Santa Ana Region (Regional Board) and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) concurred with the Department of the Navy's (DoN) findings in the FOST that the former agricultural areas were suitable for transfer as unrestricted residential use (FOST 2, 2001).

However, the frequency and sample depths of the soil samples collected in 1996 are insufficient to characterize agricultural use areas under current DTSC guidance. In addition, information regarding the potential presence of pesticides in soil within areas that were previously used for agricultural cultivation, i..e., Parcels 4, 5, 7, 8 10 and 14 and subsequently developed as part of MCAS Tustin was not reasonably ascertainable.

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

    • spazbototto earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Paul Gretza earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Troy Spurlock went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • KMac1181 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • jERRYMCK earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Our picks

    • These decisions have made a big impact on how VA disability claims are handled, giving veterans more chances to get benefits and clearing up important issues.

      Service Connection

      Frost v. Shulkin (2017)
      This case established that for secondary service connection claims, the primary service-connected disability does not need to be service-connected or diagnosed at the time the secondary condition is incurred 1. This allows veterans to potentially receive secondary service connection for conditions that developed before their primary condition was officially service-connected. 

      Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)
      The Federal Circuit ruled that pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosed condition, can constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes if it results in functional impairment 1. This overturned previous precedent that required an underlying pathology for pain to be considered a disability.

      Effective Dates

      Martinez v. McDonough (2023)
      This case dealt with the denial of an earlier effective date for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) 2. It addressed issues around the validity of appeal withdrawals and the consideration of cognitive impairment in such decisions.

      Rating Issues

      Continue Reading on HadIt.com
      • 0 replies
    • I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful.  We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did.  He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims.  He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file.  It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to  1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015.  It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me.  He didn't want my copies.  Anyone have any information on this.  Much thanks in advance.  
      • 4 replies
    • 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.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use