Jump to content

  • veteranscrisisline-badge-chat-1.gif

  • Advertisemnt

  • Trouble Remembering? This helped me.

    I have memory problems and as some of you may know I highly recommend Evernote and have for years. Though I've found that writing helps me remember more. I ran across Tom's videos on youtube, I'm a bit geeky and I also use an IPad so if you take notes on your IPad or you are thinking of going paperless check it out. I'm really happy with it, I use it with a program called Noteshelf 2.

    Click here to purchase your digital journal. HadIt.com receives a commission on each purchase.

  • 14 Questions about VA Disability Compensation Benefits Claims


    When a Veteran starts considering whether or not to file a VA Disability Claim, there are a lot of questions that he or she tends to ask. Over the last 10 years, the following are the 14 most common basic questions I am asked about ...
    Continue Reading
  • Ads

  • Most Common VA Disabilities Claimed for Compensation:   


  • Advertisemnt

  • VA Watchdog

  • Advertisemnt

  • Ads

  • Can a 100 percent Disabled Veteran Work and Earn an Income?

    employment 2.jpeg

    You’ve just been rated 100% disabled by the Veterans Affairs. After the excitement of finally having the rating you deserve wears off, you start asking questions. One of the first questions that you might ask is this: It’s a legitimate question – rare is the Veteran that finds themselves sitting on the couch eating bon-bons … Continue reading

  • 0
Sign in to follow this  

Blue Water Navy Text


Text: H.R.969 — 114th Congress (2015-2016)All Bill Information (Except Text)

There is one version of the bill.

Shown Here:
Introduced in House (02/13/2015)

1st Session
H. R. 969

To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify presumptions relating to the exposure of certain veterans who served in the vicinity of the Republic of Vietnam, and for other purposes.

February 13, 2015

Mr. Gibson (for himself, Mr. Palazzo, Mr. King of New York, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Lance, Mr. Hastings, Mr. Cramer, Ms. Pingree, Mr. Cartwright, Mr. Rothfus, Mr. Massie, Mr. Vargas, Mr. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico, Mr. Stivers, Mr. Williams, Mr. Schiff, Ms. McCollum, Mr. Duncan of South Carolina, Mr. Rush, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Farenthold, Mr. Himes, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Bishop of Georgia, Mr. Ribble, Mr. Jones, Mr. Courtney, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Connolly, Mr. Delaney, Mr. Sires, Ms. Brownley of California, Mr. McDermott, Mrs. Bustos, Ms. DelBene, Ms. Norton, Mr. Neal, Mr. Jeffries, Mr. Griffith, Mr. Cook, Mr. Amodei, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Nugent, Mr. Forbes, Ms. Sinema, Mr. Sablan, Ms. Herrera Beutler, Ms. Esty, Mr. Veasey, Ms. Clark of Massachusetts, Mr. Peters, Ms. Frankel of Florida, Mr. Carter of Texas, Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Serrano, Mr. Jolly, Mr. Fortenberry, Mr. Ashford, Mr. Polis, Mr. Lowenthal, Mr. Smith of Washington, Mr. Yarmuth, Mr. Cohen, Ms. Tsongas, Ms. Lee, Mr. Murphy of Florida, Mr. Larsen of Washington, Ms. Clarke of New York, Mr. Cicilline, Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico, Mr. Cárdenas, Mr. Honda, Mr. Meeks, Mr. Walz, Mr. Meehan, Mr. Curbelo of Florida, Mr. Joyce, Ms. Roybal-Allard, Mrs. Beatty, Mr. Tonko, Mr. Larson of Connecticut, Mr. Guthrie, Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia, Mr. McGovern, Mr. Smith of Missouri, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Mr. Latta, Miss Rice of New York, Mr. Reed, Mr. Zeldin, Mr. Barletta, Ms. DeLauro, Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney of New York, Mr. Higgins, Mrs. Lowey, Mr. Israel, Mr. Bridenstine, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Mr. Hanna, Mr. Neugebauer, Ms. Meng, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Mr. Heck of Washington, Mr. Ross, Mr. Marino, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Benishek, Ms. Gabbard, Mr. McKinley, Mr. Simpson, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. Byrne, Mr. Yoder, Mr. Rogers of Kentucky, Mr. Cole, Mr. Loudermilk, Mr. Jenkins of West Virginia, Mr. Gohmert, Mr. Rogers of Alabama, Mr. Perlmutter, Mr. Olson, Mr. Renacci, Mr. Brooks of Alabama, Ms. Sewell of Alabama, Mr. Hardy, Ms. Bordallo, Mr. Babin, Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, Mr. Nolan, Mr. Webster of Florida, and Ms. DeGette) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs


To amend title 38, United States Code, to clarify presumptions relating to the exposure of certain veterans who served in the vicinity of the Republic of Vietnam, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. Short title.

This Act may be cited as the “Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act of 2015”.

SEC. 2. Clarification of presumptions of exposure for veterans who served in vicinity of Republic of Vietnam.

(a) Compensation.—Subsections (a)(1) and (f) of section 1116 of title 38, United States Code, are amended by inserting “(including the territorial seas of such Republic)” after “served in the Republic of Vietnam” each place it appears.

(b) Health care.—Section 1710(e)(4) of such title is amended by inserting “(including the territorial seas of such Republic)” after “served on active duty in the Republic of Vietnam”.

© Effective date.—The amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) shall take effect as of September 25, 1985.

Edited by Stretch

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Thanks Stretch great news there buddy this should help out a lot of Bluewater Navy vets.

And its about fu***** time.

Hope your doing better, good to see you post Stretch.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Thanks for the information - but how does this relate to Project SHAD.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Ads

  • Our picks

    • Enough has been said on this topic. This forum is not the proper forum for an attorney and former client to hash out their problems. Please take this offline
    • Peggy toll free 1000 last week, told me that, my claim or case BVA Granted is at the RO waiting on someone to sign off ,She said your in step 5 going into step 6 . That's good, right.?
      • 7 replies
    • I took a look at your documents and am trying to interpret what happened. A summary of what happened would have helped, but I hope I am interpreting your intentions correctly:

      2003 asthma denied because they said you didn't have 'chronic' asthma diagnosis

      2018 Asthma/COPD granted 30% effective Feb 2015 based on FEV-1 of 60% and inhalational anti-inflamatory medication.

      "...granted SC for your asthma with COPD w/dypsnea because your STRs show you were diagnosed with asthma during your military service in 1995.

      First, check the date of your 2018 award letter. If it is WITHIN one year, file a notice of disagreement about the effective date. 

      If it is AFTER one year, that means your claim has became final. If you would like to try to get an earlier effective date, then CUE or new and material evidence are possible avenues. 


      I assume your 2003 denial was due to not finding "chronic" or continued symptoms noted per 38 CFR 3.303(b). In 2013, the Federal Circuit court (Walker v. Shinseki) changed they way they use the term "chronic" and requires the VA to use 3.303(a) for anything not listed under 3.307 and 3.309. You probably had a nexus and benefit of the doubt on your side when you won SC.

      It might be possible for you to CUE the effective date back to 2003 or earlier. You'll need to familiarize yourself with the restrictions of CUE. It has to be based on the evidence in the record and laws in effect at the time the decision was made. Avoid trying to argue on how they weighed a decision, but instead focus on the evidence/laws to prove they were not followed or the evidence was never considered. It's an uphill fight. I would start by recommending you look carefully at your service treatment records and locate every instance where you reported breathing issues, asthma diagnosis, or respiratory treatment (albuterol, steroids, etc...). CUE is not easy and it helps to do your homework before you file.

      Another option would be to file for an increased rating, but to do that you would need to meet the criteria for 60%. If you don't meet criteria for a 60% rating, just ensure you still meet the criteria for 30% (using daily inhaled steroid inhalers is adequate) because they are likely to deny your request for increase. You could attempt to request an earlier effective date that way.


      Does this help?
    • Thanks for that. So do you have a specific answer or experience with it bouncing between the two?
    • Tinnitus comes in two forms: subjective and objective. In subjective tinnitus, only the sufferer will hear the ringing in their own ears. In objective tinnitus, the sound can be heard by a doctor who is examining the ear canals. Objective tinnitus is extremely rare, while subjective tinnitus is by far the most common form of the disorder.

      The sounds of tinnitus may vary with the person experiencing it. Some will hear a ringing, while others will hear a buzzing. At times people may hear a chirping or whistling sound. These sounds may be constant or intermittent. They may also vary in volume and are generally more obtrusive when the sufferer is in a quiet environment. Many tinnitus sufferers find their symptoms are at their worst when they’re trying to fall asleep.

        • Like
  • Ads

  • Popular Contributors

  • Ad

  • Latest News
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines