Yes the VA ignored the "Blue Water Sailor Act" and instead quoted the older "Boots on the ground from the 1980s. Time to request help from the support team.
Give um absolute hell, this shit needs to stop NOW, nothing pisses me off more then these fucking V.A. games and the congress critters that keep feeding them! Time to make it absofuckinglootly untouchable, PERIOD!
FWIW, below is the request for information the VA wanted. Now as any that have been around can see they ask for intell for a "Boots on the ground claim". "Request Needed from you - due in 20 days If you served aboard a US Navy or Coast Guard ship on the offshore "blue waters" of Vietnam, VA will presume Agent Orange exposure if your service included duty or visitation within the country of Vietnam itself, or on its inland waterways, between January 9, 1962, and May 7, 1975. We need evidence that your ship entered Vietnam's inland waterways while you were aboard or that you went ashore while the ship was docked or at anchorage. Please provide us with the name of your ship and the approximate dates, to the best of your recollection, when your ship entered the inland waterways, docked, or otherwise sent you ashore. If your ship docked, you must state whether or not you went ashore. If you went ashore from a ship at anchorage, you must explain the circumstances. Agent Orange exposure will not be presumed if your ship just anchored temporarily in an open deep-water harbor such as Da Nang, Cam Ranh Bay, or Vung Tau, and you remained on the ship. Some Veterans served on smaller, shallow draft vessels operating primarily on the inland waterways or "brown waters" of Vietnam's rivers, canals, estuaries, and delta areas, where herbicide exposure is presumed to have occurred. Please tell us if you are one of these Veterans and provide the name of your vessel and dates of service in Vietnam." Fact is the vet filed a claim for the "Blue Water Sailor Act of 2019". Now if you answer for what they ask then you are answering for a claim you did not submit! The Vet did provide all the information in the claim for the Blue Water Sailor Act of 2019. Catch 22 deluxe.
It's a P.I.A. but you can submit a F.I.A. request for the ships logs for those times, and that proves with out any doubt that "You Were There" as it were! I really wish these assholes would stop fucking over the Navy/Coastguardsmen and simply get it done! My Dad ( being Captain of the ship) has copies of his ships logs as well as his original orders from both fleet and PACOM, so there was absolutely no way the V.A. could deny his claim, and yet they tried! We had Dad send out the full set of ships papers to every officer and crew member who ever served aboard under his command, and the V.A got pissed and issued a Cease and Desist, to which Dad got ahold of our Congress Critters and gave um hell! So far, the entire ship has been granted a variance for it's entire service time in Nam, but no absolution, Yet!
All logs were top secret and removed to the shore command of CENTCOM. As this was classed as war time SPECIAL OPERATIONS> Note the exception below. ""The ship’s deck log shall be “Unclassi- fied”, except when required by security regu- lations, i.e., wartime operations. special operations. etc. information in the ship’s deck log is “ For Official Use Only.” Regulations governing the release of information in she ship’s deck log are contained in reference"" CR-2 of 11 July 1994 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY CH-1 or 20 .March 1992 Office of the Chief of Naval Operations OPSAVINST 3100.7ss \Vtsshington. DC 203 S0-2000 OP-098H OPNAV INSTRUCTION 31 OO.7B From: TO Sub]: R) Refi Encl: Chief of Naval Operations All Ships and Stations (less hlnrine Corps field addressees not having NrIvy peracmnel attached) PREPARING, MAINTAINING AND SUBMI171NG THE SHIP’S DECK LOG (o) U.S. Navy Regulations, 1990 (b) OPNAVINST 3120.32B (C) SECNAVINST 5720.42E (d) NAVPUB 606 (1) Detailed Instructions for Keeping the Ship”s Deck Log 1. Purpose. To revise procedures for preparing, maintaining and submitting the ship”s deck log. This is a complete revision and should be read in iss entirety. 2. Cancellation. OPNA VINST 3 100.7A and OPXAV 3100/101. 3. General a. All U.S. >’avy ships in commission shall maimain a ship”s deck log as required by references (a) and (b). The ship’s deck log is she official daily record of a ship. by watches. The ship’s deck log describes every circumstance and occurrence of impmmnce or interest which concerns she crew and the operation and safety of she ‘ship. or which may be of historical value. The ship’s deck log shall be a chronological record of shose events occurring during the watch that will subscquendy meel Ihe needs of she commanding officer and provide the ultimate recipient wish a document of hktorical value. Accuracy in describing evenu recorded in she ship’s deck log is essential. Entries often constitute important legal evidence in judiciaf and ndminiscrwive fact-findhg proceedhgs arising from incidemc int,olving Lhe ship or its personnel. b. The ship’s deck log shall be “Unclassi- fied”, except when required by security regu- lations, i.e., wartime operations. special operations. etc. information in the ship’s deck log is “ For Official Use Only.” Regulations governing the release of information in she ship’s deck log are contained in reference
FOIA was tried years ago, problem is VA changed the rules and required Lat & Lon to encompass the 12 mile limits of coast of Vietnam. Thus if provided by crew member of a Special Ops ship they would be in violation of National Security Act. Glad your Dad helped. We have spent thousands of volunteer hours on this Catch 22.
It wasn't easy, but it worked! At least for "War Ships" who received orders to shell enemy costal emplacements or to provide fire support, from what I can tell, this is where the V.A. is trying to change things, they know it proves claims (based on gun range for Cruisers and Destroyers at least) they would have HAD to be within the 12 nautical mile range, this, "Within those claimed waters!" And they don't want to allow those claims! Adding the language of "within" intercostal ( Brown Water) waters is bullshit, it basically denies all blue water claims enblock! This all really burns my brisket, to first accept Blue Water claims as long as the claim can be backed up with orders of deployment, when simply naming the ship and hull number (DDG-43, U.S.S Dahlgren, or DD -779 U.S.S. Douglas H. Fox, or CS U.S.S, Salem ) as example, followed by patrols or cruises or even operations, if known! Simple and easy to prove without having to force the sailors to jump through all the fricking hoops on their own! This has always been about denying claims, and forcing the sailors to do all the hard work, when simply approving claims would be easy to prove! I still say, the whole thing should be privatized, allow access to records and let the system work as promised!
I'm with you! But Subs is a whole different fish. Then again, I have the VN service medal with three bronze stars which means the dates can be tied to operations and thus locations.
The whole point of the VA paperwork is to screw us out of our benefits. The gave my husband the run around. I was thinking about putting in a claim for injuries while deployed now that I am retired and they couldn’t screw me out of that part. Then again is it really worth fighting with the VA?
Sure you earned what they said was yours. Now you will have to prove your case. With a lot of help we proved that the "lost" records were not lost but were in Tampa Fl. at CentralCommand. United States Central Command - Wikipedia
