November 02, 2016
DoD Civilian Work Force Update 01 ► ReductionCost Savings Unknown
The Defense Department is still not tracking the cost savings it is achieving from cutting civilian employees, according to a new report. The Pentagon has tracked how many total employees it has cut since fiscal 2012, according to the Government Accountability Office audit, but not how much money it has saved from those efforts. At the same time, the department has tracked its cost savings for its contractor workforce but not the number of full-time equivalents it has successfully trimmed. The 2013 National Defense Authorization Act required Defense to make the reductions and track both figures.
The law dictated the contractor and civilian spending cuts should at least equal that of the military reductions, which the Pentagon said will equal 6.4 percent by fiscal 2017. Defense has estimated it will exceed that number on the civilian side—predicting a net cost savings of 7.1 percent from fiscal 2012 to fiscal 2017—but will not reach its target for the contract workforce. The department said it could not produce the exact number of full-time equivalent contractors it has cut because it is “unable to provide an accurate number” on the size of the workforce. It estimated it reduced contractor workforce costs between fiscal years 2012 and 2015 by 3.2 percent.The Pentagon shed 5.2 percent of its civilian workforce in the same time period, cutting about 40,000 employees. It reduced military personnel by 4.8 percent in that timeframe. The department excluded more than 70 percent of its civilians—538,000 employees—from the reductions, though GAO noted it has not offered adequate reasoning to explain the exceptions as required by law. The estimate that Defense would meet its required civilian workforce savings is based only on the 240,000 non-excepted portion of workers, GAO said.
The department said it failed to produce year-by-year savings on its civilian cuts because it thought it only had to do so in 2017.GAO advised Defense to provide the cost savings in a report it released in December. The department said it has fully complied with the auditors’ recommendations, but GAO disagreed. Defense has yet to produce efficiency plans detailing how it would achieve and implement its reductions, according to GAO.“Without an efficiencies plan, including an explanation of its exclusions, DoD has not provided Congress with information on how the department will achieve required savings,” the auditors wrote.GAO said detailed savings data was consequential because it could otherwise trim workers without realizing any financial benefit.“While FTE’s may go down, costs may go up due to a variety of factors, including annual automatic pay increases,” GAO wrote. Defense would not be able to inform Congress whether it is achieving required savings without the cost estimates, the auditors added. [Source: Defense One | Eric Katz | October 14, 2016 ++]
*****************************
DoD Fraud, WasteAbuse ► Reported 16 thru 31OCT 2016
Dallas, TX --Federal prosecutors in Texas said 14 OCT that a dozen people have been charged in a $100 million health care scheme targeting military veterans and their families.The defendants, including doctors, pharmacists and marketers, were charged in a 35-count overruling indictment returned last week in Dallas, according to U.S. Attorney John Parker. Prosecutors contend the men sought to defraud Tricare, the health insurance program for veterans and their families.Authorities say the scheme involved the prescription of pain and scar creams. They say a Dallas-based company was formed to market compounds that had little medical benefit and that kickbacks were provided to physicians and others who promoted the compounds.
Authorities said in a news release that nine people were arrested this week on charges that include conspiracy to commit health care fraud. A 10th person surrendered to the FBI and two others were arrested earlier this year."The indictments and arrests in this investigation highlight another step forward by DCIS and its law enforcement partners to protect the integrity of the Department of Defense (DoD) health care program known as TRICARE," Special Agent in Charge Janice M. Flores said. "Fraud and abuse by pharmacies and medical providers that bill for compounded prescriptions and/or medications is a significant threat to the DoD health care system." Flores continued by saying that DCIS must keep investigating fraud in order to preserve taxpayer dollars. [Source: Associated Press | October 14, 2016 ++]
*****************************
Burn Pit Toxic Exposure Update 38 ► GAO SEP Report Issues
The Pentagon needs to study the long-term health effects of exposure to the chemicals inhaled from burn pits at its overseas military bases, the Government Accountability Office says in a report.While the report, released in September, credited the Department of Defense with improving practices to mitigate the risks of exposure to the burn pits, the department still needs to ensure that “research specifically examines the relationship between direct burn pit exposure and long-term health issues.”
The GAO found there hasn’t been enough progress on this issue over the past five years, when it first said more study was needed.“The current lack of data on emissions specific to burn pits and related individual exposures limits efforts to characterize potential long-term health impacts on service members and other base personnel,” the report warned.Open-air burning has always been a mainstay of waste disposal during times of war. But the technology of modern warfare means that such new items as plastic bottles and electronics are being burned, presenting new health risks.Burn pits were constructed at more than 230 U.S. military bases across Iraq and Afghanistan before their use was restricted in 2009.
Although the military gave assurances that the air quality was within safe levels, troops returning home began complaining of problems as early as 2004.Massive open-air burn pits at the bases billowed the toxic smoke and ash of everything from Styrofoam, metals and plastics to electrical equipment and even human body parts.The flames were stoked with jet fuel. While it took nearly three decades for the U.S. government to eventually link Agent Orange, the defoliant used in Vietnam, to cancer, President Obama has pledged quick action to make determinations about the effect of the burn pits on perhaps as many as 60,000 U.S. troops.
A 2011 report by the Institute of Medicine outlined the data needed for assessing exposures and potential related health risks. In response, the Department of Veterans Affairs established a registry to collect information. However, the Department of Defense has not undertaken data-gathering and research efforts to specifically examine this relationship to fully understand any associated health risks, the GAO report said.To date, the VA’s official position is that research has not established evidence of long-term health problems from exposure to burn pits. The magnitude of the issue, however, may not be clear for decades as delayed war casualties slowly emerge. In Minnesota alone, it is estimated that more than 14,000 Minnesota Army and Air Guard troops qualify to be part of a national registry for potential burn pit exposure, based on where they were stationed during deployments.
The Star Tribune recently documented the plight of Minnesota Air National Guard veteran Amie Muller, who is battling pancreatic cancer and several other maladies after returning from deployments to Balad Air Base in Iraq, site of one of the most notorious military base burn pits.Despite the mounting public outcry from vets, their families and members of Congress, the VA continues to say research does not show evidence of long-term health problems, and that most irritation is likely temporary. U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar has proposed a national center to study the long-term affects of burn pits.While generally agreeing with the GAO report, the Pentagon said the report should have acknowledged research that the Department of Defense already has completed with other organizations. [Source: Minnesota Star Tribune | Mark Brunswick | October 24, 2016 ++]
*****************************
Gulf War Syndrome Update 40 ► Claim Time LimitExtension
The VA is seeking to expand the time limit that veterans can claim disability benefits for Gulf War Syndrome by five years. In a document to be published in the Federal Register on 17 OCT, the VA seeks to expand the time limit that veterans of the Gulf War may claim disability benefits for the chronic multi symptom illness known as Gulf War Syndrome from December 31, 2016 until December 31, 2021. The VA is inviting the public to comment on their plans by December 18, 2016. The document, with instructions for commenting can be found on the Federal Register website
Gulf War Syndrome is defined by the VA as a cluster of medically unexplained chronic symptoms that can include fatigue, headaches, joint pain, indigestion, insomnia, dizziness, respiratory disorders, and memory problems. REfer to Gulf War Syndrome page for more details. There is no medical or scientific evidence about the nature and cause of the illnesses suffered by Gulf War veterans, however the VA says that studies by the National Academy of Sciences proved that these conditions occur in Gulf War Veterans three times more than they do in the civilian population. Based on that fact, the VA grants what it calls "presumptive disability" to veterans suffering from these conditions. Presumptive Disability means that Gulf War Veterans suffering from these conditions don't need to prove their military service caused the health problems in order to receive VA disability compensation.
In their request to extend the time period that veterans may claim disability for Gulf War Syndrome, the VA cited a study done earlier this year by the National Academy of Sciences that stated "at present, there is insufficient basis to identify the point, if any, at which the increased risk of chronic multi symptom illness may abate". That means the symptoms may still show up in veterans more than 25 years after the war's end. In order to provide fairness to affected veterans the VA says they want to continue to provide disability benefits to veterans suffering from Gulf War Syndrome no matter when the illnesses begin. [Source: Military.com | Jim Absher | October 14, 2016 ++]
*****************************
Traumatic Brain Injury Update 57 ► Improperly Examined Vets
Thousands of veterans may have been improperly diagnosed by the VA. The federal department admits it was improperly testing for traumatic brain injuries from 2007 through 2015. The VA sent out letters to all veterans they believe may have had an improper screening.If you are a veteran who is concerned about your TBI exam you can call 1-800-749-8387.
-o-o-O-o-o-
Number of veterans who may have been impacted:
Station / Regional Office / Unique Veterans318 / Winston-Salem / 2,992
316 / Atlanta / 2,091
346 / Seattle / 2,076
362 / Houston / 1,800
377 / San Diego / 1,394
344 / Los Angeles / 1,288
351 / Muskogee / 1,279
349 / Waco / 994
335 / St Paul / 742
322 / Montgomery / 950
314 / Roanoke / 818
317 / St Petersburg / 652
329 / Detroit / 485
341 / Salt Lake City / 477
325 / Cleveland / 428
327 / Louisville / 409
330 / Milwaukee / 383
348 / Portland / 370
340 / Albuquerque / 331
320 / Nashville / 309
321 / New Orleans / 309
326 / Indianapolis / 309
339 / Denver / 301
331 / St Louis / 298
345 / Phoenix / 277
343 / Oakland / 250
310 / Philadelphia / 234
319 / Columbia / 212
350 / Little Rock / 209
301 / Boston / 171
459 / Honolulu / 167
328 / Chicago / 149
307 / Buffalo / 133
354 / Reno / 102
311 / Pittsburgh / 102
405 / White River Junction / 101
306 / New York / 86
313 / Baltimore / 80
438 / Sioux Falls / 77
308 / Hartford / 77
452 / Wichita / 70
323 / Jackson / 66
315 / Huntington / 55
347 / Boise / 55
355 / San Juan / 54
333 / Des Moines / 51
334 / Lincoln / 47
309 / Newark / 46
373 / Manchester / 45
436 / Fort Harrison / 45
304 / Providence / 36
442 / Cheyenne / 27
402 / Togus / 25
463 / Anchorage / 21
372 / Washington / 10
437 / Fargo / 10
460 / Wilmington / 8
358 / Manila / 5
Total* / 24,588
[Source: WNCN Raleigh NC | Jonathan Rodriguez | October 27, 2016 ++]
VA Agent Orange Claims Update 07 ► Herbicide Use in Thailand
For years, the U.S. military and Department of Veterans Affairs have used the work of a Wyoming-based herbicide expert to flatly reject the claims of groups of veterans who believe Agent Orange made them sick.But occasionally, individual veterans have fought back — and even more rarely, they have won. One of them is Air Force veteran Phil Cacioppo. In 2007, Cacioppo was diagnosed with a rare form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. He assumed he’d be approved for cash compensation and to receive treatment at VA hospitals. After all, he believed he’d been exposed to Agent Orange while he served as a ground radio equipment repairman at the U-Tapao Airfield in Thailand from 1969 to 1970. And his type of cancer had been associated with the herbicides used during the Vietnam War.But Cacioppo’s claim for benefits was denied, at least in part based on the research of Alvin Young, the government’s oft-chosen expert, records show. “U-Tapao Airfield is not on the Department of Defense listing of herbicide spray areas and test sites outside the Republic of Vietnam,” the VA’s St. Louis Regional Office wrote in its 2011 claim denial.
While the denial letter didn’t cite Young, it relied on the conclusions of a 2006 report he wrote under contract for the Pentagon. In it, Young said many veterans confused commercial herbicides, used on many bases to kill weeds, with the stronger “tactical herbicides,” including Agent Orange, which were used in combat.In his appeal to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, Cacioppo argued that there was no evidence that the military distinguished between tactical and commercial herbicides. In 2012, the board sent the claim back for further consideration, noting “the Veteran’s contention that a distinction between tactical and commercial herbicides did not exist in records published during the Vietnam era.”
Cacioppo, 70, a semi-retired engineer in Kansas City, Missouri, ultimately won his claim in 2013. The VA didn’t mention Agent Orange, but said he’d been exposed to herbicides and deserved benefits.“We have conceded your … exposure to herbicide agents while stationed in Thailand,” the VA wrote in granting him 100 percent disability. “Our review of the multiple lay statements and military and VA documents contained within your claims folder provided us with enough credible evidence to determine you conducted military duties near the air base perimeter.” The VA had previously determined that extremely strong herbicides of some sort had been sprayed there.
In a 2013 report for the VA, Young criticized the VA’s decision to grant such benefits, saying it ran counter to the evidence he found.Cacioppo ended up receiving compensation dating back to 2007, when he first filed a claim, but he blames Young for the delay, which kept him from having his cancer treatment and expensive medications covered at VA hospitals until 2013.“This report by Alvin Young has been used often to deny ill veterans benefits that were stationed in Thailand such as myself,” he wrote to the VA in May 2013.Cacioppo has contributed to a website ( to help other Thailand veterans win benefits — and overcome Young’s contentions. “I don’t think it should have been that hard,” he said in a recent interview.
-o-o-O-o-o-
/ DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRSVeterans Benefits Administration
Washington, D.C. 20420
Memorandum for the Record
Subject: Herbicide use in Thailand during the Vietnam Era
10
The Compensation and Pension Service has reviewed a listing of herbicide use and test sites outside Vietnam provided to our office by the Department of Defense (DoD). This list contains 71 sites within the U.S. and in foreign countries where tactical herbicides, such as Agent Orange, were used, tested, or stored. Testing and evaluations of these tactical herbicides were conducted by or under the direction of the U.S. Army Chemical Corps, Fort Detrick, Maryland. The list does not contain names of individuals. Additionally, it does not contain any references to routine base maintenance activities such as range management, brush clearing, weed killing, etc., because these vegetation control activities were conducted by the Base Civil Engineer and involved the use of commercial herbicides approved by the Armed Forces Pest Control Board. The application of commercial herbicides on military installations was conducted by certified applicators. DoD has advised us that commercial herbicides were routinely purchased by the Base Civil Engineer under federal guidelines and that records of these procurements were generally kept no longer than two years. We have also reviewed a series of official DoD monographs describing in detail the use, testing, and storage of herbicides at various foreign and domestic locations. In addition, the Project CHECO Southeast Asia Report: Base Defense in Thailand, produced during the Vietnam era, has been reviewed.
Regarding your veteran claimant with Thailand service, the DoD list indicates only that limited testing of tactical herbicides was conducted in Thailand from 2 April through 8 September 1964. Specifically, the location identified was the Pranburi Military Reservation associated with the Replacement Training Center of the Royal Thai Army, near Pranburi, Thailand. The Report of these tests noted that 5 civilian and 5 military personnel from Fort Detrick, Maryland conducted the spray operations and subsequent research. This location was not near any U.S. military installation or Royal Thai Air Force Base.
Tactical herbicides, such as Agent Orange, were used and stored in Vietnam, not Thailand. We received a letter from the Department of the Air Force stating that, other than the 1964 tests on the Pranburi Military Reservation, there are no records of tactical herbicide storage or use in Thailand. There are records indicating that commercial herbicides were frequently used for vegetation control within the perimeters of air bases during the Vietnam era, but all such use required approval of both the Armed Forces Pest Control Board and the Base Civil Engineer. In Vietnam, tactical herbicides were aerially
applied by UC-123 aircraft in Operation RANCH HAND or by helicopters under the control of the U.S. Army Chemical Corps. Base Civil Engineers were not permitted to