Hope for Blue Water Veterans

[Berta]

Carol Ozanecki- Blue Water vet Advocate called me with this news:

https://www.stripes.com/news/lawmakers-launch-new-effort-to-provide-agent-orange-coverage-for-blue-water-navy-vets-1.525395

Also there is a article in Pop Culture she sent to me----mentionig Blue Water vets buy I felt it was too political to post here. You can google it if you want to read it.

 

 

[Berta]

Unfortunately Commander John Wells, (Vet lawyer and on Fox news on this issue from time to time- and maybe tomorrow)and John Rossie (BWVVA) have already made that point in testimony to Congress...if you mean that the ship water filtration did not remove the dioxin......

AO has been the most important issue of my life regarding veterans-

I think the Danang Harbor situation is absurd... the harbor picked up run off from the tributaries in Vietnam, 

water that had already been contaminated by AO.

I dont know how the Blue Water story will end.It is one issue however that many advocates and veterans  have consistently fought over with the VA.I commend them for the years they have put into this fight.

[Berta]

The bill is set for Mark up today- as far as I know:

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/05/05/lawmakers-launch-new-effort-provide-agent-orange-coverage-blue-water-navy-vets.html

I will be gone most of the day- if anyone gets any info on it please let us know.......

HR 299 

[Berta]

Update:

In part:

"A proposal from U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney, D-2nd District, to expand benefits to so-called Blue Water Navy veterans, those who served on ships in the territorial seas of Vietnam, has passed a key House committee.

The proposal, H.R. 299, the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act, would require the Department of Veterans' Affairs to expedite consideration for VA benefits if the veterans suffer from any of the 14 health conditions that the federal government recognizes as being linked to Agent Orange exposure. The House Committee on Veterans' Affairs on Tuesday passed the legislation, which Courtney introduced with U.S. Rep. David G. Valadao, a Republican representing California's 21st District."

https://www.theday.com/military-news/20180508/bill-to-provide-va-benefits-to-blue-water-navy-vets-passes-key-us-house-committee

[Blueboy]

Available information concerning HR 299 shows that there is no need to specify sailors who were ‘within the Territorial Seas of Vietnam’ because the headcount used by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) for costing the legislation includes all sailors who served within the Theater of Combat of Vietnam. The area of the Territorial Seas is just a small portion of the Theater of Combat.  < http://www.oldbluewater.com/three line map.pdf > 

The CBO Cost Estimate dated May 15, 2018 for H.R. 299 tells which Vietnam veterans were used to develop the estimated costs of the legislation. They are defined as “about 174,500 service members [who] served offshore during the Vietnam War.” The number 174,500 includes all sailors of the Seventh Fleet who served within the Vietnam Theater of Combat and was taken from periodic DoD OASD (Comptroller) reports by the Directorate for Information Operations and Control.  < http://www.oldbluewater.com/ADA150910_1-3.pdf >

By the title of the Bill and by frequent references within the Bill, the target individuals are also defined as “veterans who served in the territorial seas of Vietnam during the Vietnam War.” Navy veterans who served within the Territorial Seas are only a portion of the total number of veterans that were used in the costing of the H.R. 299. This could cause confusion. 

The number 174,500 is shown in the Defense Manpower Data Center report titled “Vietnam Conflict – Casualty Summary” which provides an estimated breakdown of active duty service members from each branch of the Armed Forces who served during the Vietnam War. 
< https://dcas.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/pages/report_vietnam_sum.xhtml >  [As of May 29, 2018.]

The categories for “[Total] Number Serving” are broken down by Branch as well as by ‘location’ and are given for NAVY as:
-    Number Serving Worldwide – 1,842,000
-    Number Serving Southeast Asia – 229,000
-    Number Serving South Vietnam – 174,000
< www.oldbluewater.com/Congressional Research Service.pdf  >

Aside from 174,500 Navy Personnel (estimated by the CBO to be 500 more than the Data Manpower Data Center number), there are no other naval personnel eligible for presumptive exposure by virtue of service in Vietnam. The 174,500 individuals represent both those who served in the Vietnam Theater of Combat and those within that subset group which served in the Territorial Seas of Vietnam and there are no other naval personnel to consider.   

Given these facts, H.R.299 could go to the Committee of the House without mention of the Territorial Sea. This would facilitate much clearer instructions for the VA to implement this legislation.

 

Source has asked to remain anonymous.