Scientists studying dioxin exposure in humans — including Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange — have found a correlation between the chemicals and the death rates of heart disease and cardiovascular disease. The research, presented in Environmental Health Perspectives shows that there are consistent and significant dose-related associations with heart disease and modest associations with cardiovascular disease. Researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health and the Environmental Protection Agency said they realized that most dioxin studies had centered on cancer rates, but no one had produced a review of research about cardiovascular disease. “Future studies in both animals and humans should assess whether cardiovascular effects are present at environmentally relevant doses,” the authors wrote. Environmental Health Perspectives’ editor, Hugh Tilson, said the report is of interest because cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of death in many countries, and dioxin exposure can be prevented.
[Source: NavyTimes Kelly Kennedy article 21 Nov 08 ++]

Retired members who have been paying SBP premiums for at least 30 years (360 months) and have reached at least age 70 on Oct. 1, were to be considered “paid-up” and have no more premiums deducted from their retired pay.  NAUS and FRA have received many phone calls and emails from their members who believe they are qualified yet are still having the premiums deducted.  According to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) an appeal process is being developed for beneficiaries who believe they qualify for “paid up” status but are still having their SBP premium deducted from their retired pay.  DFAS has assured that any beneficiary who is qualified for “paid up” status and had premiums deducted from their retired pay will be provided a full refund.  A reason you may not be qualified is that you lost your spouse and your account was placed on hold status until you remarried.  The date you remarried is NOT the start date for resumption of SBP premiums.  That does not occur until one year after the new marriage. Also any payments you may have made for the Retired Servicemembers Family Protection Program (RSFPP), the program in effect prior to SBP, do not count towards the paid-up provision. There are several other instances that may affect your account.  To check on these, go to the DFAS Retiree Newsletter at  http://www.dfas.mil/rna-news/october2008/paid-uprsfppandsbpupdate.html or call DFAS at 1-800-321-1080.  Be advised that your wait may be long as the phone system at DFAS has been overwhelmed lately.

 [Source: NAUS Weekly Update 21 Nov 08 ++]

Gulf War syndrome is real and afflicts about 25% of the 700,000 U.S. troops who served in the 1991 conflict, a U.S. report said 17 NOV. The report broke with most earlier studies acknowledging  two chemical exposures consistently associated with the disorder -- one to the drug pyridostigmine bromide given to soldiers to protect against nerve gas and the other used (often overused) to protect against desert pests -- were cited as causes in the congressionally mandated report. "The extensive body of scientific research now available consistently indicates that Gulf War illness is real, that it is a result of neurotoxic exposures during Gulf War deployment, and that few veterans have recovered or substantially improved with time," according to the 450-page report presented to Secretary of Veterans Affairs James Peake. The report bolstered the hopes of thousands of U.S. and allied veterans who have struggled to have their varied neurological symptoms, including memory loss, concentration problems, rashes and widespread pain, recognized by the government. The government for years maintained that the symptoms manifested were because of stress or other unknown causes. The panel of scientists and veterans also called upon Congress to appropriate $60 million annually to conduct research into finding a cure for the disorder calling it a 'national obligation. The report, which went to Veterans Affairs Secretary James Peake on the 17th, said, "The Defense Department cut research money from $30 million in 2001 to less than $5 million in 2006. Both agencies have identified some of their research as Gulf War research even when it did not entirely focus on the issue. Substantial federal Gulf War research funding has been used for studies that have little or no relevance to the health of Gulf War veterans,' the panel concluded."

         The new report http://sph.bu.edu/insider/index.php?%20option=com_content&task=view&id=1579&Itemid=150 is the product of the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses (RAC-GWVI), which was chartered by Congress because many members thought that veterans were not receiving adequate care. On the 15-member committee appointed in 2002, scientists made up about two-thirds and the rest were veterans. Some scientists were not convinced that the new report had found the long-sought smoking gun. "Even though we know that the DoD did ship pesticides, it doesn't mean that the people who were exposed to them were the ones who ended up having symptoms," said Dr. Lynn Goldman, a professor of environmental health sciences at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore who has worked on previous reports on the illness. "We felt that there needed to be better records of where people were, what they were exposed to and their prior health status going in." Several reports had already been issued by the prestigious Institute of Medicine, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, blaming stress and other unknown causes for the soldiers' symptoms. There's something about going to the Gulf and serving in the Gulf that has caused something bad and persistent and real, but we have not found any evidence for a specific cause," said Dr. Harold C. Sox, chairman of a 2000 institute study and editor of the journal Annals of Internal Medicine. Veterans blame the institute's reports for the difficulties they've faced in getting treatment for their problems.

         According to RAC-GWVI, at least 64 pesticides containing 37 active ingredients were used during the war. They were sprayed not only around living and dining areas, but also on tents and uniforms, White said. There was less evidence to support a link to the U.S. demolition of Iraqi munitions near Khamisiyah, which may have exposed about 100,000 troops to nerve gases stored at the facility, according to the panel. The panel said it could not rule out a link between the illness and exposure to oil well fires and multiple vaccinations. But it could find no evidence linking it to depleted uranium shells, anthrax vaccine and infectious diseases. In addition to increased rates of memory loss, fatigue and pain, Gulf War veterans have higher rates of brain cancer and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or Lou Gehrig's disease, the panel also noted. "The tragedy here is that there are currently no treatments," said panel chair James H. Binns, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense and a Vietnam veteran. "The tragedy here is that there are currently no treatments," said the panel's chairman, James H. Binns, a former principal deputy assistant secretary of Defense and a Vietnam veteran. Binns emphasized that the report was not written to yield recriminations about past actions. "The importance . . . lies in what is done with it in the future," he said. "It's a blueprint for the new administration." [Source:  Los Angeles Times article 18 Nov 08 ++]

House Veterans’ Affairs Committee Chairman Bob Filner (D-CA) released this statement following the roundtable discussion 19 NOV on the shredding of veterans’ documents by the VA:

    "Today’s roundtable revealed a number of shortcomings within the VA that are hardly new and most definitely failing our nation’s veterans. I am encouraged that the VA came forward and revealed that important documents were slated for the shredding bin.  "I remain angry that a culture of dishonesty has led to increased mistrust of the VA within the veteran community.  A systemic lack of integrity seems pervasive and that is a shame. First, I am not convinced that only 500 documents were saved from the shredding bin.  This is merely a snapshot in time.  The VA was unable to convince me that more documents have not been shredded in the past and I honestly do not know how many records have been destroyed and how many files lost over the past decades. Second, we have heard promises from the VA before.  We have heard that the claims process will go paperless.  Training will be improved.  VA’s latest promise is that veterans can submit statements containing information that will be used in the adjudication process in lieu of documents missing from their files.  While this is an important step forward, I am skeptical that this new step will become part of the claims process. Additionally, the VA’s outreach has been limited to a reliance on media reports and a message on the VA website.  The VA did not report a systematic way of reaching out to veterans to alert them of new policies that may have huge implications in their claims going forward. Finally, Congress has routinely asked VA what it needs to adequately care for veterans and the response has been that it is adequately poised.  This is clearly not adequate care for our veterans. Listen, this is a long-term systemic problem that will require uncomfortable changes, long hours, unprecedented cooperation, extraordinary progress, and a new system of independent oversight.  Clearly, the current system of self-reporting and internal regulation is ineffective.  Congress must hold the VA accountable for a job NOT WELL DONE.  A complete paradigm shift is necessary and I look forward to working with new leadership to correct the problems plaguing the benefits claims system.  I am pleased that veterans have begun to work on transition issues in the impending Obama Administration.  I plan to work with veterans service organizations, veterans, and the VA to fundamentally change the way that the Veterans Benefits Administration conducts business."

         At the conference doubts were raised about whether the Bush administration can do anything to restore confidence in the Veterans Affairs Department following the discovery last month of key benefits claims documents in shredding bins at regional offices. But the problem, initially discovered by teams of auditors from the VA inspector general’s office, didn’t exactly shock the veterans’ community. Veterans have complained for decades about VA losing or destroying claims documents, making an already complicated process even more difficult to deal with. Veterans’ advocates attending a roundtable discussion arranged by the House Veterans Affairs Committee said VA’s admission of mishandling documents is a sign of the fundamental problems that veterans have seen for years. Rick Weidman, executive director for government affairs of Vietnam Veterans of America, said the only real news is that VA now acknowledged the problem. “Shredding is not the issue,” he said, calling instead for focus on “the integrity of the process.”Rep. Harry Mitchell, D-Ariz., said he is worried that leaving key documents to be shredded is a sign of a larger workload problem and pressure to meet production quotas. Mitchell said it has led him to wonder whether VA officials have been completely honest when they said they had all of the resources they needed to handle claims. Retired Vice Adm. Patrick Dunne, VA’s undersecretary for benefits, said the problem reflects poor document handling procedures, not an effort to prevent veterans from getting what is due them. The ultimate answer, he said, is a completely electronic filing system in which key records are scanned into a computer — although a paperless claims processing system won’t be available before 2010.

         A short-term solution, which might not be fully in place before President-elect Barack Obama takes office in January, sets new document management procedures for every VA regional office — including establishing records management officers and requiring two people to review any document before shredding. Rep. Bob Filner  said the fact that a review found 41 of the 57 VA regional offices had crucial documents in shredding bins is an “intolerable situation.” “These actions completely shatter confidence in the whole VA system,” Filner said. “This episode has further strengthened my belief that we need to have accountability in [VA] and leadership that demands accountability. These incidents and mistakes, all occurring to the detriment of our veterans and never to their benefit, remind me more of the Keystone Cops than a supportive organization dedicated to taking care of our veterans.” The VA has announced special procedures for veterans who believe lost records have led to the denial or delay of a benefits claim. [Source: AirForceTimes Rick Maze article 19 Nov 08 ++]

  A Veterans Administration employee and 13 other people have been charged with conspiring to steal nearly $2 million in disability claims. All but one of the defendants is a veteran. Each is charged with conspiracy to defraud, as well as paying or receiving bribes, and some with money laundering. They are scheduled to appear Dec. 16 for arraignment in U.S. District Court in Louisville. Veterans Affairs service Representative Jeffrey Allan McGill and Daniel Ryan Parker, a veteran and officer with the Disabled American Veterans, were among the 14 charged 18 NOV by a federal grand jury with conspiring to defraud the U.S. of $1.9 million through the submission of false veterans’ disability claims to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The indictment outlines an alleged scheme for veterans to falsely claim to have suffered from bipolar disorder, hearing loss, frostbite, back injuries and other ailments and disabilities. The indictment says veterans received lump-sum payments for back pay and then kick backed as much as two-thirds of it to Parker and McGill.

         If convicted on all charges, Parker could be sentenced to up to 90 years and fined $2.25 million; McGill, who lives in La Grange, could be imprisoned for 70 years and fined $1.75 million. “They’re all veterans,” U.S. Attorney David Huber said at a news conference 20 NOV. “That’s what’s sad about all of this.” Parker, 37, of Crestwood, is free on $25,000 bond. He is also charged with stealing $47,000 from Disabled American Veterans. His attorney, Brian Butler of Louisville, said his client plans to plead not guilty. “We’ve been aware of the investigation for months and have cooperated with investigators,” Butler said. Huber said the remaining defendants, who live in Kentucky, Illinois and West Virginia, would voluntarily surrender at arraignment. Huber said Parker and McGill received between $500,000 and $600,000 in kickbacks, with the rest of the stolen money being split among the participants.

         According to the indictment, starting in 2003 and continuing until this month, Parker and McGill recruited friends, relatives and acquaintances who were military veterans to file fraudulent claims with the VA. Parker and McGill then allegedly either altered the veterans’ medical records, or created counterfeit medical records, to give the appearance that the veterans had service related disabilities. That resulted in the veterans receiving 100% disability for problems such as depression or cancer due to Agent Orange exposure during combat in Vietnam, according to the indictment. Huber said the case came to light after a tip from a confidential source. He declined to discuss how the source knew about the alleged plot. “But for that confidential source, this case may not have been known for some time, if at all,” Huber said. Michael Keen, the resident agent in charge for the Department of Veterans Affairs in Louisville, said the scheme could hurt veterans who needed the funds allegedly purloined. “Obviously, the Department of Veterans Affairs doesn’t have a bottomless pit of money,” Keen said. Huber said prosecutors will try to recoup the money taken during the scheme. [Source: NavyTimes AP Brett Barrouquere article 20 Nov 08 ++]

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is warning consumers about a scheme to extort money by callers who falsely identify themselves as FDA officials. The agency has received several reports of calls to entice consumers to purchase discounted prescription drugs by wiring funds to a location in the Dominican Republic. No medications are ever delivered, but an "FDA special agent" calls to say that a fine of several thousand dollars must be sent to an address in the Dominican Republic to prevent imprisonment or other legal action. The FDA suspects that the scheme began with the theft of personal information from consumers who previously purchased drugs through the Internet or by telephone or who were victims of credit card fraud. Complaints or other information about this scheme should be reported to the FDA Office of Criminal Investigations at (800) 521-5783. [Source:  Consumer Health Digest #08-47 18 Nov 08 ++]

Effective 1 JAN 09, Tricare will reduce the rates for Tricare Reserve Select (TRS). Monthly premiums for TRS individual coverage will drop 44% from $81.00 to $47.51, and TRS family coverage will drop 29% from $253.00 to $180.17. The 2009 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), section 704, required Tricare to analyze Reserve Select costs from 2006 and 2007, and set new rates for 2009. “Now that TRS has been in place for several years, we were able to calculate premiums for 2009 from actual cost data obtained in earlier years,” said Army Maj. Gen. Elder Granger, deputy director of Tricare Management Activity. “It is important to provide high quality and affordable healthcare coverage for our National Guard and Reserve families.” Established in 2005, TRS is a premium-based health plan for National Guard and Reserve personnel available for purchase by members of the Selected Reserve who are not eligible for or enrolled in Federal Employee Health Benefit plans. TRS provides a health plan option to members of the Selected Reserve and their families when they are not on active duty status. The TRS plan delivers coverage similar to Tricare Standard and Extra to eligible members who purchase the coverage and pay monthly premiums. TRS also features continuously open enrollment. For more information about TRS refer to the Tricare Web site at http://www.tricare.mil.  [Source: Tricare News Release No. 08-114 dtd 19 Nov 08 ++]

 The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)  announced 17 NOV special procedures for processing claims from veterans, family members, and survivors whose applications for financial benefits from VA may have been mishandled by VA personnel.  These special procedures come after an audit by VA’s Inspector General found documents waiting to be shredded at some of VA’s regional offices that, if disposed of, could have affected the financial benefits awarded to veterans and survivors. “I am deeply concerned that improper actions by a few VA employees could have caused any veterans to receive less than their full entitlement to benefits earned by their service to our nation,” said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Dr. James B. Peake. “In rectifying this unacceptable lapse, VA will be guided by two principles – full accountability for VA staff and ensuring veterans receive the benefit of the doubt if receipt of a document by VA is in question,” he added. VA worked with the six largest veterans’ service organizations in developing these special new procedures.  The procedures will assist veterans and survivors in establishing that an application or another document was previously submitted to VA, but was not properly acted upon by VA and was not retained in the veteran’s records. The special procedures cover missing documents submitted by a veteran or other applicant for VA benefits during the 18-month period between 14 APR 07 and 14 OCT 08. VA will process any missing applications or evidence resubmitted under these special procedures as if the document had been originally submitted on the date identified by the claimant.

          Veterans and other applicants have one year, or until 17 NOV 09, to file previously submitted documents under these special procedures. Veterans not covered by these special rules who believe relevant material is missing from their files can submit additional documentation at any time.  An award of benefits earlier than 14 APR 07, may be established if there is credible corroborating evidence supporting an earlier date of document submission. When this problem of mishandled documents was uncovered on 14 OCT 08, VA immediately ceased all shredding activities while it established tighter controls over all claims documents and conducted special training for all employees who process veterans’ applications. All regional office shredding equipment and operations are now under the strict control of the facility records management officer.  Every employee has been given a separate receptacle for papers appropriate for shredding.  These receptacles are subject to review by supervisors and other officials. Before any claims document can be shredded now, it must now be reviewed by two people and the facility records management officer. VA’s Inspector General is continuing to investigate a small number of cases where inappropriate shredding may be traceable to a specific employee.  Legal and disciplinary action will be initiated to hold accountable any employee who has acted improperly. Veterans and others who are concerned about missing documents and want more information on the special processing procedures may call 1-800-827-1000 for assistance or go to http://www.vba.va.gov/VBA/specialprocedures_qa.asp . They may also send an e-mail inquiry through IRIS@va.gov or visit their local VA regional office. VA representatives will review VA’s record systems to verify receipt of applications and supporting evidence and will assist anyone desiring to file a claim under the special processing procedures for missing documents.  [Source: News Release 17 Nov 08 ++]

    ===============================

The Labor Department has written new rules to expand Family and Medical Leave Act benefits that represent a dramatic change in how National Guard and reserve members and caregivers responsible for seriously injured troops will be treated by employers. One benefit, which applies immediately, allows up to 26 weeks of unpaid time off without fear of losing a civilian job for spouses, parents, siblings, children or other blood relatives taking care of seriously injured or disabled service members. The one catch is that it only applies while the injured service member is still in the military, and ends after separation or discharge. A second benefit, which employers have 60 days to implement, allows families of mobilized Guard and reserve members up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave, with their job fully protected, for a variety of deployment-related reasons, including attending military briefings, handling legal or financial issues, emergency child care arrangements and even taking a vacation of up to five days if the service member gets mid-deployment rest and recuperation leave. Families of active-duty members are not eligible for the deployment-related time off because Congress did not authorize it, Labor Department officials said.

         Joy Dunlap of the Military Officers Association of America said the two additions to the Family and Medical Leave Act, known as FMLA, will be a great boon to families who are struggling with the demands of ongoing military operations. But blocking active-duty families from the deployment leave is something her association plans to challenge, she said. “They included a wide variety of things, and I think this is going to be very positive for the family members of those covered,” Dunlap said. “This will help them to take care of important household matters and help them protect marriages, and will help retention of service members.” Dunlap also cautioned that Family and Medical Leave Act benefits are not available to everyone. Generally, benefits are provided only to workers at companies with 50 or more employees who are full-time workers with at least a year on the job, she said. Victoria Lipnic, assistant labor secretary for employment standards, said the rules attempt to be as generous as possible under limitations of the law but acknowledged there are restrictions. “We were as generous as we could be,” she said. Caregiver leave has been authorized under FMLA since January, but regulations explaining how companies are supposed to apply it have only now been finalized, Lipnic said. Under the rules, a caregiver can take up to 26 weeks of unpaid leave over one year, with the clock beginning on the first day of leave. The policy allows leave to be taken only once per injury, but more than one person in a family might be qualified. If there is a second injury or a subsequent diagnosis of a new problem, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, the benefit could be used again, Lipnic said. While FMLA applies to a limited group of immediate family members, military caregiver leave has a broader definition under which spouses, siblings, parents, children and next-of-kin — the nearest blood relative — could qualify. In extended families, more than one blood relative could receive the leave, Lipnic said.

        The deployment leave program, which applies to Guard and reserve families, is aimed at people whose lives are “turned upside down” and who “have a lot of issues to deal with,” Lipnic said. There are several broad categories in which the leave can be used, she said. For example, unpaid leave could be taken if the Guard or reserve member must deploy with less than seven days’ notice; attend military-related events like briefings; accommodate school activities or emergency child care; make financial or legal arrangements; attend counseling, which would not necessarily have to be provided by a health care provider; ot attend post-deployment events, such as arrival ceremonies and briefings. Regulations also have a catch-all clause that allows time off for other events not covered if the employer and employee agree, Lipnic said. In what may become one of the more controversial aspects of the new rules, unpaid leave could be used for up to five days of vacation if the service member received rest and recuperation leave while deployed. The five-day leave would be provided each time the service member receives R&R. Lipnic said the deployment leave provisions were worked out after discussions with military associations and the Defense Department. While regulations are being published now, employers technically do not have to provide deployment leave until JAN because they have 60 days to implement the regulations, she said. A key reason the rules are being expanded for military families was 2007 testimony before a House subcommittee by the wife of an injured Army sergeant. Sarah Wade, the wife of Army Sgt. Edward Wade, told a House panel that after her husband was injured by a roadside bomb in Iraq, she tried to hold on to her restaurant job in Chapel Hill, N.C., while making three trips a week to visit her husband, who was being treated 250 miles away at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C. Wade said she was fired after about 15 months for being away from work too much and also was forced to drop out of college.

 [Source: ArmyTimes Rick Maze article 14 Nov 08 ++]

 Under pressure from Congress and following the Army’s lead, the DoD has imposed a more rigorous screening process on the services for separating troubled members due to “personality disorder.” The intent is to ensure that, in the future, no members who suffer from wartime stress get tagged with having a pre-existing personality disorder which leaves them ineligible for service disability compensation. Since the attacks of 9/11, more than 22,600 service members have been discharged for personality disorder.  Nearly 3400 of them, or 15%, had served in combat or imminent danger zones. Advocates for these veterans contend that at least some of them were suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or traumatic brain injury but it was easier and less costly to separate them for personality disorder.  By definition, personality disorders existed before a member entered service so they do not deemed a service-related disability rating.  A disability rating of 30% or higher, which most PTSD sufferers receive, can mean lifelong access to military health care and on-base shopping.

         Over the last 18 months, lawmakers and advocates for veterans have criticized Defense and service officials for relying too often on personality disorder separations to release member who deployed to Iraq, Afghanistan or other another areas of tension in the Global War on Terrorism. A revised DoD instruction (No. 1332.14), which took effect without public announcement 28 AUG 08, responds to that criticism.  It only allows separation for personality disorder for members currently or formerly deployed to imminent danger areas if:
    1)    The diagnosis by a psychiatrist or a PhD-level psychologist is corroborated by a peer or higher-level mental health professional;
    2)    If the diagnosis is endorsed by the surgeon general of the service, and
    3)    If the diagnosis took into account a possible tie or “co-morbidity” with symptoms of PTSD or war-related mental injury or illness.

    Sam Retherford, director of officer and enlisted personnel management in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, said adding “rigor and discipline” to the process when separating deployed members for personality disorder is “very important,” considering what is at stake for the member. Last year several congressional hearings focused on overuse of personality disorder separation after The Nation magazine exposed apparent abuses in a MAR 07 article.  It described the experience of Army Specialist Jon Town.  In OCT 04, while Town stood in the doorway of his battalion's headquarters in Ramadi, Iraq, an enemy rocket exploded into the wall above his head, knocking him unconscious. When he came to, Town was numb all over, bleeding from his ears, and had shrapnel wounds in his neck.  For two years he struggled with deafness, loss of memory and depression before the Army, in SEP 06, separated Town after seven years’ service.  He was separated for a pre-existing personality disorder and without disability benefits. Writer Joshua Kors suggested there might be thousands of veterans like Town, separated administratively to save the services billions of dollars in benefits.

         Last year, moved by this story and others, the Senate adopted an amendment to the fiscal 2008 defense authorization bill from now president-elect Barack Obama (D-IL), Kit Bond (R-MO) and Joseph Liberman (IND-CT).  It directed Defense officials to report on service use of personality disorder separations, and the GAO to study how well the services follow DoD’s rules for processing such separations. The Army meanwhile reviewed its own use of personality disorder separations for more than 800 soldiers who had wartime deployments.  That review quickly found some “appalling” lapses, said an official, including incomplete files and missing counseling statements.  A few months ago the Army tightened its own rules for using personality disorder separations. In JUN, the Defense Department reported to Congress that it would add rigor to its personality disorder separation policy, previewing the changes implemented in late AUG.  The Navy strongly had opposed the changes because it frequently uses personality disorder separations to remove sailors found too immature or undisciplined to cope with life at sea. Requiring their surgeon general to review every personality disorder separation from ships deployed in combat theaters would be too burdensome, the Navy argued.  But Defense officials insisted on the changes.

         The DoD report in JUN showed the Navy led all services in personality disorder separations.  For fiscal years 2002 through 2007, the Navy total was 7554 versus 5923 for the Air Force, 5652 for the Army and 3527 for the Marine Corps.  The Army led in personality disorder separations to members who had wartime deployments, with a total of 1480 over six years. The Navy total was 1155, the Marine Corps 455 and the Air Force 282. DoD said it found no indication that personality disorder diagnoses of deployed members were prone to systematic or widespread error.  Nor did internal studies show a strong correlation between personality disorder separations and PTSD, brain injury or other mental disorders. “Still, the Department shares Congress’ concern regarding the possible use of personality disorder as the basis for administratively separating this class of service member,” the report said. In late OCT, GAO released its findings based on a review of service jackets for 312 members separated for personality disorder from four military installations. It said the services were not reliably compliant even with the pre-AUG regulation governing separations.  For example, only 40 to 78% of enlisted member separated for personality disorder had documents in their files showing that a psychiatrist or qualified psychologist determined that their disorder affected their ability to function in service.

[Source: Stars & Stripes Tom Philpott article 14 Nov 08 ++]

A high-ranking U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs administrator from Guilderland NY has been placed on paid leave in the wake of an investigation into his office.  Joseph Collorafi was suspended last month as chief of veterans affairs at the New York City regional VA office, said Keith Thompson, acting director of the office. The investigation revealed that someone in the regional office intentionally entered claim documents from veterans with incorrect dates — called "backdating" — into an internal database, VA spokeswoman Alison Aikele said Wednesday. "They would make it look like they were processing claims faster than they really were," said Aikele, who works in Washington, D.C. Changing the dates made it appear that the management was not "severely underperforming," according to Aikele. She said the leadership of the office in Manhattan was replaced and the individuals who left would not be returning. She maintained that no veterans were affected by the backdating.  The VA office in New York City serves 800,000 veterans living in 31 counties.

         Collorafi, 62, commuted on Amtrak from his home in Guilderland to his job, which pays about $135,000 a year. James O'Neill, the VA's assistant inspector general for investigations, said a subsequent investigation revealed the shredding of documents. "We're looking at a couple of facilities to determine whether the shredding that occurred was intentional or not," O'Neill said. Destroying or altering federal documents could be a criminal offense. O'Neill did not confirm nor deny whether Collorafi's leave was linked to that probe. Collorafi declined repeated requests for comment on this story. His attorney, Peter Noone, said the investigation was not related to Collorafi. "I'm not sure that has anything to do with him," Noone said.

         This week, two veterans groups filed a lawsuit in District of Columbia federal court claiming the VA takes too long to process disability claims by veterans. The agency averages at least six months per claim, the process can stretch to a year and appeals take up to four years on average, according to the suit filed Monday by the Vietnam Veterans of America and the Veterans of Modern Warfare. In recent weeks, 41 of 57 regional VA offices across the country have come under scrutiny over the possible shredding of supporting evidence in claims filed by veterans. Next week, the Democratic chairman of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, U.S. Rep. Bob Filner of California, will hold a hearing on the destruction of the records. In 1987, when he was a lieutenant colonel in the National Guard, Collorafi was investigated by the FBI amid accusations that Collorafi and another officer, William F. McIntosh, filed requests for training pay for training they did not receive. The alleged incident, which involved a total of $1,500, occurred when Collorafi was director of the New York Guard's recruitment program, a post he held from 1980-85. The outcome of that case was not immediately known. O'Neill said the investigation into shredding at the New York regional office in Manhattan could take months. [Source: Albany Times Union Scott Waldman article 13 Nov 08 ++]

The government is appealing a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims that found DoD unlawfully had withheld $150,000 combined in survivor benefit payments from three military widows. If the claims court decision stands — as advocates for the widows think it will — DoD would be forced to restore full Survivor Benefits Plan (SBP) payments worth millions of dollars to several hundred surviving spouses. The surviving spouses with a stake in the outcome all remarried after age 57, which made them eligible, under the Veterans Benefits Act of 2003 [Public Law 108-183] to have their Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) restored by the VA. But the widows argued successfully to the claims court that the same law did something more; it exempted them from the dreaded dollar-for-dollar reduction in SBP payments that occurs if they also elect to receive DIC. The widows contend that Congress made them the first group of surviving spouses eligible for “concurrent receipt” of DIC and SBP, thus taking a first step five years ago toward eventually eliminating the DIC-SBP offset for up to 44,000 surviving spouses. At the claims court last June, Judge George W. Miller ruled that the facts and the law support the widows’ argument that the 2003 law “partially repealed” the SBP-DIC offset, targeting widows eligible who remarry after age 57. Here is some background to understand the ruling.

    •    Under SBP, military retirees forfeit a monthly premium so that, if they die first, their surviving spouse, or a dependent child, will continue to receive up to 55 percent of their retired pay as an SBP annuity. Some of these same survivors also qualify for DIC — monthly compensation from the VA payable to surviving spouse if a servicemember dies while on active duty or a military retiree dies of a service-related disability.
    •    The long-time hitch for surviving spouses eligible for both SBP and DIC is that to elect to draw tax-free DIC, they must agree to have their SBP reduced by an equal amount. The basic DIC rate is $1,091 a month, with more added for each dependent child. Accepting DIC suspends SBP entirely for many widows.
    •    Before Dec. 16, 2003, eligibility for DIC ended when a surviving spouse remarried. The Veterans Benefits Act of 2003 modified that rule, allowing DIC to continue or to be restored from that date forward, if the remarriage occurred when a surviving spouse was age 57 or older. This change made more than 12,000 widows eligible again for DIC — if they knew to apply for it.
    •    Advocates for military widows said the 2003 law intentionally was worded so that widows who remarried after age 57 would be the first to receive both SBP and DIC. But DoD pay officials and lawyers interpreted the law so that all surviving spouses continued to have their SBP reduced or wiped out by their restored DIC.
    •    In July 2007, three widows, backed by the Gold Star Wives of America, filed their claims court lawsuit. In June, Judge Miller ruled in their favor, saying Patricia R. Sharp, remarried widow of an Army brigadier general, was owed nearly $74,000; Margaret M. Haverkamp, remarried widow of a retired Army lieutenant colonel, was owed $46,300; and Iva Dean Rogers, remarried widow of an Army master sergeant, was owed nearly $32,400.
    •    Government attorneys have said they will appeal that decision. Their appeal brief is due to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal District by Nov. 21. They will argue anew that Congress didn’t intend, in passing the 2003 law, to allow concurrent receipt of SBP and DIC for such a narrow class of surviving spouses, those who remarry after age 57. Even if Congress had that intention, they will argue, the law is written too ambiguously to allow concurrent receipt.

    Michael R. Franzinger, a lawyer representing the widows, says he is confident the appeals court will uphold Miller’s 25-page opinion, which persuasively details how Congress intended the law to be interpreted: to shield these remarried widows from any reduction in SBP when their DIC was restored. Indeed, this columnist confirmed this intention of members and staff of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee in JAN 04. Rep. Henry E. Brown Jr. (R-S.C.), then chair of the personnel subcommittee, says: “We put a special paragraph in there to, basically, get [DoD] to do that. This was to get the camel’s nose under the tent, sort of like we did with concurrent receipt” for disabled retirees. Judge Miller referred to Brown’s quote in his opinion, though he relied on legal arguments for his actual opinion.  “They’ll wait until we die,” says 83-year-old Rogers, with a laugh, when told it could take another year to get a final decision on the government’s appeal. “I believe it will eventually come through. My husband fought in three wars, and he was confident I would be taken care of. … I’m not going to give up.” Franzinger said the government won’t restore any of the disputed SBP payments until its appeal is exhausted. But it likely will have to pay the widows interest back to the June date of Miller’s original ruling. [Spouce: MOAA News Exchange Tom Philpott article 5 Nov 08 ++]

 The Department of Veterans Affairs presumes that specific disabilities diagnosed in certain veterans were caused by their military service. If one of these conditions is diagnosed in Vietnam Vet, VA presumes that the circumstances of his/her service (i.e. exposure to Agent Orange) caused the condition, and disability compensation can be awarded. This includes DIC education and CHAMPVA for spouses of veterans rated 100% or surviving spouses late-veterans that died from discussed medical problems. The following disabilities may be presumed for those who served in the Republic of Vietnam between 1/9/62 and 5/7/75:

    •    chloracne or other acneform disease similar to chloracne*
    •    porphyria cutanea tarda*
    •    soft-tissue sarcoma (other than osteosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, Kaposi's sarcoma or mesothelioma)
    •    Hodgkin's disease
    •    multiple myeloma
    •    respiratory cancers (lung, bronchus, larynx, trachea)
    •    non-Hodgkin's lymphoma
    •    prostate cancer
    •    acute and subacute peripheral neuropathy*
    •    type 2 diabetes
    •    chronic lymphocytic leukemia
    Note*: Must become manifest to a degree of 10% or more within a year after the last date on which the veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during active military, naval, or air service.
    [Source: County of Humboldt Veterans Service office 12 Oct 08 ++]

Attention Veterans, Attorneys and Veterans Service Officers:

Project SALUTE will be in Raleigh, North Carolina Monday October 27 through Wednesday October 29th, to  assist veterans in need of free legal aid and to train attorneys in this critical area of law.  

Hosted by the Veterans Foundation of North Carolina, Veterans Law Project, Project Salute provides Veterans Federal Benefits information and Individual Benefits Interviews to veterans and military families.  The Project SALUTE team is honored to provide free legal aid to low-income Veterans by conducting training seminars for pro bono attorneys and service officers.   

If you are a veteran in need of assistance in North Carolina, Individual benefits interviews will be conducted on a first come first served basis.   General information sessions will run all day.

All first-time disability claims shall be referred to veteran service officers only.   Denied claims, to be appealed, are referred to pro bono attorneys who attend the training.

If you are  a veteran in need or an attorney wishing to assist these citizens, then join us for this program.  Registration, Details and travel information are provided below:

Raleigh, North Carolina
October 27-29, 2008

Veterans Federal Benefits Information Session & Individual Benefits Interviews*:
Monday & Tuesday, October 27-28, 2008
Location: VFW Department of North Carolina
917 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27611
919-828-5058
Time:10:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
Map/Driving Directions

Project SALUTE is a mobile veterans legal clinic providing individual counseling for Veterans seeking assistance with federal disability and pension benefits matters and training for pro bono attorneys agreeing to represent a Veteran, free of charge, with a disability or pension benefits issue.

The National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) has provided
the following website for veterans to gain access to their
DD-214's online: http://vetrecs.archives.gov/      This may
be particularly helpful when a veteran needs a copy of his
DD-214 for employment purposes.  NPRC is working to make it
easier for veterans with computers and Internet access to
obtain copies of documents from their military files.
Military veterans and the next of kin of deceased former
military members may now use a new onlinemilitary personnel
records system to request documents.  Other individuals
with a need for documents must still complete the Standard
Form 180, which can be downloaded from the online web site.
Because the requester will be asked to supply all
information essential for NPRC to process the request,
delays that normally occur when NPRC has to ask veterans
for additional information will be minimized.  The new
web-based application was designed to provide better
service on these requests by eliminating the records
centers mailroom and processing time.

Google "va health care system" and at the top is "Request Rejected."   This seems to be a common response from the VA to service men and women searching for help.  But the Veterans Administration cannot be blamed for  all shortcomings.  It is the responsibility of citizens everywhere to take a roll in assisting our military families.

 

Congratulations to Craig Kabatchnick and the North Carolina Central University Law School.  Recently Craig was made a professor for the Veterans Law Clinic student programs to service military families. 

"The clinic is booming" says Kabatchnick who started as the supervising attorney at the Veterans Law Clinic. last year  Now, as a professor he can service the students and veterans in need of legal support in a greater capacity as a university staff member. 

This is an excellent example of how law schools can step up to provide pro bono services to their community of military families, making it easier for lawyers to assist in the education process.

NCCU has a wealth of clinical services, but the Veterans Law Clinic fulfills a need never met before.  Veterans and military families are finding the help they need while students receive a unique, hands on education.

If you are a professor or staff member at your local law school, contact the Veterans Law Project to  join our board and engage your university in clinical programs to benefit military families and law students.

If you are a member of a military family, active or veteran and need legal assistance, contact the Veterans Law Project  for possible assistance.