Section Purpose:     to locate unit buddys to substantiate a claim.

BACKGROUND       Go to Personal Bulletins

The spouse of a Thailand veteran emailed me for assistance in locating buddys of her husband that could provide testimony in the form of a substantiating affivdavit to support his claim.



Photo Evidence

Below, you will find Ginny's email to me and my initial response where I cite a legal precedence for a Thailand veteran that the Board granted service connection solely on his testimony alone, re: Waco, Texas Board.

Ginny indicated that the VA "official" that she communicated with disregarded the significance of any photo evidence.     I disagree.     Any reasonable person, Board Judge, will consider the merits of all supporting documents presented by a claimant.

Photo Evidence

Since President Clinton signing into law the VCAA/2000 before leaving office, this is a time of integrating the doctrine of benefit of the doubt versus a well-grounded claim in a court of law.

Well-grounded Claims versus Benefit of the Doubt

Keep in mind, although, it would be nice to have verifiable affidavits from others in your unit.   It is no longer a necessity.

Researching BVA Rulings     Search




The new law and regulations also include new notification provisions. Specifically, they require VA to notify the claimant and the claimant's representative, if any, of any information, and any medical or lay evidence, not previously provided to the Secretary, that is necessary to substantiate the claim. As part of the notice, VA is to specifically inform the claimant and the claimant's representative, if any, of which portion, if any, of the evidence is to be provided by the claimant and which part, if any, VA will attempt to obtain on behalf of the claimant. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103 (West Supp. 2001); 66 Fed. Reg. 45620, 45630 (Aug. 29, 2001) (to be codified at 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(b)).     See Subsections (b) & (c) of § 3.159 in the above red box.

"When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C.A. §5107(b) (as amended); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102."

Legal Precedence for Thailand Vets intransit     See also MAC Flight Data.

Citation Nr: 0515988   Decision Date: 06/14/05; the issue:   Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus.

Quote/The veteran's contention is that his diabetes is the result of being exposed to Agent Orange. In this regard, the veteran must have service in the Republic of Vietnam between January 9, 1962 and May 7, 1975 to be afforded the presumption of herbicide exposure. The veteran contends his exposure occurred while on route to Thailand in February 1967. The veteran stated that he changed planes in Vietnam and spent a period of several hours in Vietnam at that time. It should be pointed out that the veteran seems credible in his reported statements. The Board notes that there is no requirement as to how long the veteran was in Vietnam; even a few hours of service in country is sufficient to establish the presumption of exposure. See Veterans Benefits Administration Manual M21-1, Part III, Chapter 5, Par. 5.10(c) (July 1, 2004). In this regard the Board notes that it was common practice at the time the veteran was being transferred to Thailand to allow for stopovers in Vietnam so military personnel could avail themselves of facilities and supplies that were not available to them in more remote postings such as Thailand. In addition, the Board finds the veteran's statements with regard to his travel at that time credible, particularly when viewed in conjunction with the statement from the retired Air Force Colonel who noted that his route to Thailand, in January 1967, took him through Vietnam. Accordingly, the Board finds that there is a tenable basis to find that the veteran did have a brief period of service in Vietnam in February 1967. Therefore, resolving all doubt in favor of the veteran, service connection for diabetes mellitus is granted on a presumptive basis due to Agent Orange exposure.

A word on the arrogance and incompetence of the V.A. agency

You can provide all the proper documents and still be denied.     You see, I came to this conclusion long ago.     It is not about your welfare as a veteran, but the government in not having to pay you disability compensation, on top of healthcare for service connection.

The agency will lose paperwork, incompetent, and ignore other aspects of your documents, eg, combat zone "CZ"; blatant arrogance.

John Foster, a Thailand veteran, that served in 1964 provided me with a copy of his PCS Orders; Page Two that had the names of other unit soldiers.     Just information, coupled with affidavits from these soldiers that confirm John was on the same flight that stopped in Vietnam, ie, "visitation" premise, is more than adequate to support John's claim.


Warmest regards,


Franco Picchione
Veterans Advocate - Las Vegas
(702) 363-3290
Email Link

READ ME FIRST

Having trouble finding something?     Did you follow all the links found on this page?   .. the right margin links?   Okay, then give me a call for a quick answer.     I expect all veterans, except the most severely ill, to perform a certain degree of research (as provided herein) before calling me.

Links:

Preface     Table of Contents     Case Studies     CFR Reference     USC Guide     Selecting a VSO

Thailand Vets for Equal Treatment     Evidence of Service in Vietnam     Serving in Thailand

Legal Counsel     Filing Your Claim     See Soldiers of Justice.       Go to Personal Bulletins

Haas Ruling/Key Rulings     In the appellant Haas, a 3-judge panel found in favor of a class of Vietnam Era Veterans which held the Vietnam Service Medal * (award) as sufficient basis for conceding exposure to toxins/agent orange in Vietnam.     Unfortunately, the ruling has been placed on hold; initially, unlawfully, and then after a Petition for Extraordinary Relief by appellant Ribaudo, a lawful injunction on all such class claims to be adjudicated (versus pending appeal already.)     Background Info

* AFEM/Vietnam award prior to the VSM Criteria

Questions

(a)   Is your claim based solely upon the Haas ruling, ie, VSM award?

(b)   Or, are you claiming that you did "step foot in Vietnam" sometime in your military service?

Those that their claim is solely based upon Haas, will not be adjudicated until the agency completes its appeal in a Federal District Court.     Mid-May, I emailed the offices of Senator Harry Reid, my senator in Nevada and the Senate Majority Leader.     The response was that my request was forwarded to "the appropriate officials."     See Investigation for background info.

If your claim is two-fold, Haas-issue of VSM plus claim to "setting foot in Vietnam," then your claim should be adjudicated to that point and provided a docket no. for the Board of Appeals for any initial denial based solely on non-Haas issues.

Benefit of the Doubt Doctrine since November 9, 2000

Keep in mind, since VCAA of 2000 (and President Bill Clinton,) well-grounded, significant burden of proof is on the V.A. to dispel competent evidence of such documents.     In other words, if they have proof otherwise, present it.     You present what you have and with due process, have your claim granted.

  I. Duty to Assist

On November 9, 2000, the President signed into law the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA), Pub. L. No. 106-475, 114 Stat. 2096 (2000). The Act is applicable to all claims filed on or after the date of enactment, November 9, 2000, or filed before the date of enactment and not yet final as of that date. The new law eliminates the concept of a well-grounded claim, and redefines the obligations of the VA with respect to the duty to assist claimants in the development of their claims. First, the VA has a duty to notify the claimant and representative, if represented, of any information and evidence needed to substantiate and complete a claim. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5102 and 5103 (West 2002). Second, the VA has a duty to assist the claimant in obtaining evidence necessary to substantiate the claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A (West 2002).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

There has been a significant change in the law during the pendency of this appeal with the enactment of the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA), Pub. L. No. 106-475, 114 Stat. 2096 (2000). The law and regulations eliminate the concept of a well-grounded claim, redefines the obligations of VA with respect to the duty to assist, and supersedes the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in Morton v. West, 12 Vet. App. 477 (1999), withdrawn sub nom. Morton v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 174 (2000) (per curiam order) (holding that VA cannot assist in the development of a claim that is not well grounded). The new law also includes an enhanced duty to notify a claimant as to the information and evidence necessary to substantiate a claim for VA benefits. See 66 Fed. Reg. 45,620 (Aug. 29, 2001)(to be codified as amended at 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156, 3.159). Hereinafter known collectively as VCAA.

The VCAA is applicable to all claims filed on or after the date of enactment, November 9, 2000, or filed before the date of enactment and not yet final as of that date. Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-475, § 7, subpart (a), 114 Stat. 2096, 2099 (2000). See also Karnas v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 308 (1991). In this case, VA's duties have been fulfilled.

In the circumstances of this case, a remand would serve no useful purpose. See Soyini v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 540, 546 (1991) (strict adherence to requirements in the law does not dictate an unquestioning, blind adherence in the face of overwhelming evidence in support of the result in a particular case; such adherence would result in unnecessarily imposing additional burdens on VA with no benefit flowing to the veteran); Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426, 430 (1994) (remands which would only result in unnecessarily imposing additional burdens on VA with no benefit flowing to the veteran are to be avoided). VA has satisfied its duties to notify and to assist the appellant in this case.

Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110.

When all the evidence is assembled, VA is responsible for determining whether the evidence supports the claim or is in relative equipoise, with the appellant prevailing in either event, or whether a preponderance of the evidence is against a claim, in which case, the claim is denied. Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990).
 

    Sarcastically, I would like to tell them where they can go.     You stopped in Vietnam, 40 years ago, on a Mac flight and are supposed to provide (well-grounded) evidence -- especially after the above signing of the VCAA/2000 by President Clinton!     Provide them with the (a) Mac Flight Data Sheet and (b) cite the legal precedence of the Waco, Texas Board Court Ruling Citation Nr: 0515988   Decision Date: 06/14/05; where the Thailand veteran was granted service-connection based soley on his testimony.     A plausible scenerio and the benefit of the doubt doctrine should be in favor of the claimant.     If this is only happening at the Board of Appeal Court, then Congress and the public need to know that the adjudication system the agency has adopted ignores (a) supporting testimonial statement of the claimant and (b) legal precedence.     They did in my initial denial; in the administrative review.     These ROs have either been instructed on stone-walling, or their is a conflict of interest in the VSO infrastructure, or both.

Unit Buddy Locator Bulletins

Email Link

"Writing your personal bulletin" Tips

Provide as much information about the veteran, unit organization and location as well as the specific dates.     John Foster provided a copy of his PCS (Permanent Change of Station) military orders, Page One; Page Two. Someone reading these orders may not be listed, but know the whereabouts of these individuals and be helpful in assisting you locate them.


Personal Bulletin (June 6, 2007)     Chris Milgo (Phu-Mu)

STRATCOM LONG LINE BATTALION 1965-1967

Photos:   Base - Aerial     Perimeter Wire     Work Crew     Airmen Techs     Jan 67

Email your reply to:   DollMgtCo@aol.com         VSO:   Unknown         VA Official:   Unknown