Training information and guidance on hexavalent chromium exposure at the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant in Basrah, Iraq, was provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs to all VA Regional Offices in 2010.
- To inform regional office employees on specific environmental hazard incidents that present potential health risks to service members and veterans
- To provide guidance on handling claims for disabilities potentially resulting from exposure to environmental hazards while on active duty
- To provide “fact sheets” that may serve as valuable resources for VA examiners when they conduct Compensation and Pension (C&P) examinations associated with these exposures.
It’s important for veterans who were affected by exposure to lung carcinogen hexavalent chromium by the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant during active duty service to know how the VA is guiding its employees to handle the associated claims.
Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant in Basrah, Iraq
General Information: From approximately April through September of 2003, Army National Guard (NG) personnel from Indiana, West Virginia, South Carolina, and Oregon served at the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant in Basrah, Iraq, and were assigned to guard contract workers who were restoring the plant. During that time, sodium dichromate, a source of hexavalent chromium, which was previously used as a corrosion-preventing chemical by former Iraqi plant workers, was found on the ground and measured in the air. Hexavalent chromium, or Chromium VI (six), in sodium dichromate is a lung carcinogen through inhalation.
Chromium VI is also an acidic compound that can cause immediate irritation to the eyes, nose, sinuses, lungs, and skin. USACHPPM provided a medical evaluation for certain soldiers there at the time, which took place in October 2003. According to USACHPPM, 137 service members were evaluated. The results at the time showed some abnormalities in individuals, such as complaints of eye, nose, throat and/or lung irritation, or abnormal pulmonary function, kidney, or liver tests. However, the Army stated that it could not specifically trace these symptoms to chromium exposure.
C&P Service has also begun researching the list of identifiable service members to determine who has filed claims for disability benefits for any condition potentially related to this toxin exposure. Research is ongoing and is primarily focused on, but not limited to, diseases of the skin and respiratory system. This assessment takes into consideration all identifiable members of the Guard who have previously filed disability claims for such conditions and who have claims currently pending for such conditions. It also assumes that such claims were filed after exposure, but not necessarily expressly related to exposure.
The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has begun to augment the Gulf War Registry to reflect service at Qarmat Ali. VHA is verifying the numbers of these Veterans who have either enrolled in care or received a Gulf War Registry examination. The involved Guard members who have had an initial examination will be recalled to have a complete exposure assessment as well as a more targeted physical examination and ancillary testing to detect indications of health outcomes that may be related to hexavalent chromium. Those who have yet to enroll in the registry will receive this targeted exam initially, which includes a chest radiograph and pulmonary function test. This evaluation will be repeated periodically.
DoD has confirmed with VA that NG personnel from Indiana, West Virginia, South Carolina, and Oregon served at the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant in Iraq. Therefore, verification of individual exposure is not required for Veterans who served in one of these NG units if their service in Iraq was between April through September 2003.
Claims Processing Policies and Procedures
A. Priority of Processing
Because of the potential of receiving claims due to exposure to environmental hazards from Veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, employees should review VBA Letter 20-07-19 dated February 6, 2009, to determine if “priority processing” procedures apply.
B. End Product Control and Tracking
Upon receipt of service connection claims for disabilities due to exposure to environmental hazards or toxic agents, establish a standard end product, (e.g., 110, 010, 020). A special end product to control these issues is not necessary.
Employees involved in the development of these claims must choose the appropriate Special Issue identifier on the MAP-D Contentions screen. Currently, the only identifier pertaining to exposure claims is “Environmental Hazard in Gulf War,” which is only appropriate for exposure within Southwest Asia. As C&P Service updates corporate applications, (i.e., MAP-D, RBA 2000, etc.) to better track and identify these types of claims, we will notify the field accordingly. Therefore, so as not to dilute future data on hazardous exposure claims regarding Southwest Asia service, do not use the “Environmental Hazard in Gulf War” identifier for claims regarding Atsugi or Camp Lejeune service.
By taking the following steps in the development process, raters will be well-equipped to make fair and equitable decisions on service-connection claims as a result of exposures to environmental hazards.
• If Veteran alleges exposure to environmental hazards during service, but does not claim service connection for a specific disability, inform the veteran that he/she must at least identify a symptom or cluster of symptoms since exposure in and of itself is not a disability.
• Ensure the claimant provides at least some general information about the exposure event. A follow-up letter or phone call to the Veteran may be required if the Veteran fails to provide sufficient information regarding exposure and/or disability claimed because of such exposure.
o Notwithstanding the foregoing instructions, regional office personnel must actively review cases for potential exposure. While many service members who served in Iraq and/or Afghanistan may have been exposed, for example to burn pits and particulate matter, not all Veterans will be aware of such exposure or will associate such exposure with specific disabilities.
o Therefore, regional office personnel must be vigilant in reviewing claims from Veterans with Southwest Asia service, especially when the claim is for service connection for disabilities such as respiratory, skin, autoimmune, neurological (except where clearly caused by injury), gastrointestinal disorders, etc. Many Veterans will simply be unaware of the possible link between such disabilities and the exposures discussed in this training letter. In these cases, it may be necessary to invite or solicit a specific claim from the Veteran and undertake the development procedures explained in this training letter.
• Develop for service treatment records and any VA and/or private medical records that are noted by the claimant.
• Verify dates of military service and obtain military personnel records as per normal procedures.
Verifying Exposure to Environmental Hazards
Verifying and/or conceding exposure is one of the key elements in the adjudication process. VA is actively working with DoD to identify individuals who were exposed to specific environmental hazards while serving in the military. In most cases, it will not be possible to refer to a list of service members present at a specific location. It is critical that VA employees rely upon all available sources of evidence when verifying and/or conceding exposure.
Currently, C&P Service has only acquired a list for those who served at the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant in Basrah, Iraq. For other incidents, if exposure cannot be verified through an official list provided by DoD, then personnel records should be reviewed for evidence that corroborates the Veteran’s statement of exposure.
IMPORTANT: Service Treatment Records, to include the Post-Deployment Health Assessment (PDHA) and Discharge Examination, should be carefully reviewed for exposure information. The PDHA includes specific questions relating to exposure incidents.
Because military service records will not verify all incidents, if any, of exposure, alternative evidence such as personal statements, buddy statements, unit histories, news articles, or other lay evidence shall be considered in establishing whether the Veteran participated in or was affected by an in-service exposure incident. Exposure may be verified or conceded, if the statements provided by the Veteran and/or others are consistent with the facts, places, and circumstances of the Veteran’s service. 38 U.S.C. § 1154(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).
Because of the widespread nature of the burn pits, and the inability of military personnel records to identify all duty locations, the Veteran’s lay statement of burn pit exposure generally will be sufficient to establish the occurrence of such exposure if the Veteran served in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Djibouti. For example, a Veteran who performed guard duty at a burn pit in Iraq would have been subject to potentially higher levels of toxic exposure than someone who did not perform such duty. The Veteran’s service records will generally not provide that level of detail necessary to show that he/she performed that particular duty. Thus, if the statements provided by the Veteran and/or others are consistent with the facts, places, and circumstances of his or her service, then concede them as a fact of record. See Id. (Do not confuse this section with the provisions found at 1154(b)—applicability of 1154(a) does not require evidence of combat).
Further, in applying section 1154(a) to concede a Veteran’s exposure to burn pits and PM specifically, it is important to remember the information contained in section 1.A. and 1.B. of this Training Letter. Essentially, that VA is aware, primarily through cooperation with DoD, of the extent of potentially hazardous exposures (i.e., elevated PM levels throughout Iraq, Afghanistan, and Djibouti; as well as burn pits located at all military FOBs in these same regions). Therefore, VA is aware of the “facts, places, and circumstances” of a Veteran’s service in those regions. Going beyond section 1154(a) by requiring proof of exposure, such as by service personnel or unit records, could arguably violate section 1154(a). The resulting interplay between VA’s knowledge of exposure and section 1154(a), results in easily conceding exposure without an actual “presumption” of exposure.
Note: Because Veterans generally will not possess the type of exposure information contained in this training letter, regional office personnel should be aware of the environmental hazards that may apply for Veteran claimants who served in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Djibouti, even if the claimants did not allege such exposure, (e.g., Particulate Matter exposure). Be aware also that more than one environmental hazard may apply when Veterans are alleging exposure to a specific event. For example, if a Veteran claims a disability due to exposure at the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant, each pertinent Fact Sheet should be provided to VA examiners, as explained below, since the Veteran served in Iraq and could have been exposed to burn pit emissions and the same high levels of particulate matter as others in the Southwest Asia theater of operations.
VA Examinations and Medical Opinions
In claims for disability compensation, VA has the responsibility to assist the claimant by obtaining a medical opinion and/or examination when the opinion and/or examination is necessary to make a decision on the claim. 38 CFR 3.159(c)(4)
Reminder: Generally, VA examinations are ordered for all claims received within one year of separation from the military, unless the evidence is sufficient for deciding the claim. This includes a general medical examination and any specialty examinations deemed necessary.
In claims received more than one year after separation from service, a VA examination should be ordered for environmental-hazard claims when the evidence of record contains the following three elements:
• Element 1: Evidence of a current diagnosed disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of disability.
• A claimant ordinarily lacks the medical training and experience to diagnose his/her own medical condition or offer a medical opinion. However, a claimant is competent to describe symptoms of disability that he/she is experiencing, (e.g., shortness of breath, coughing, fatigue, skin rash, etc.). Therefore, medical evidence of the claimed disability is not necessary to trigger the VA examination request as long as the claimant describes persistent or recurrent symptoms of the claimed disability.
• Element 2: Evidence that the veteran was exposed to an in-service exposure event or incident, including a Veteran’s lay evidence. For the purposes of this element, exposure to certain environmental hazards can be conceded, on a case-by-case basis, as previously discussed.
• See section on Verifying Exposure to Environmental Hazards
• Element 3: Evidence that the claimed disability or symptoms may be associated with the in-service exposure event.
• In determining whether a claimed condition may be associated with an in-service exposure incident and therefore warrants a VA examination or opinion request, you must consider the information herein to determine if the Veteran’s symptoms may be representative of an illness or disease linked to a specific exposure. Because the scientific studies to identify health effects of exposures are in the preliminary stages, C&P Service is providing general guidelines as to what type of symptoms trigger a VA examination or opinion. If in doubt, regional office personnel should err on the side of the Veteran when determining if a VA examination or opinion is needed. If that doubt exists in any degree, then evidence of a current disability (or symptoms of a disability) is sufficient to request a medical examination and medical nexus opinion if the proper service is verified and no evidence exists of subsequent cause for the disability.
• Regional office personnel should carefully review lay statements that may provide evidence that shows continuity of symptoms from service to the present. In cases where evidence showing continuity of symptoms is strong, medical examinations/opinions may not be necessary. In others, it may serve as evidence that a claimed condition may be associated with an in-service exposure event(s). Ultimately, VA employees should remember that the threshold bar for requesting an examination/opinion is very low, but if existing evidence is satisfactory to decide the claim, then a VA examination is not necessary.
What to Include in a VA Examination or Medical Opinion Request
When requesting medical examinations, inform the examiner of the Veteran’s service along with the location and nature of the environmental hazard in which the Veteran was exposed. When requesting examinations/opinions, always forward the claims file to the medical examiner (or appropriate material to the contract examiner) and direct him or her to review the medical and other evidence in the claims folder and provide a rationale for his or her opinion. Fact Sheets explaining the various environmental hazards are attached to this training letter. The pertinent Fact Sheets must be made available to the VA medical examiner for review. The examiner should state whether it is more likely, less likely, or as likely as not that a Veteran’s claimed condition is related to the hazardous environmental exposure. The fact sheet(s) must subsequently remain in the record.
Note: The Fact Sheets are not meant to influence examiners rendering opinions concerning the etiology of any particular disability, but rather to ensure that such opinions are fully informed based on all known objective facts. It is imperative that examiners utilize this information objectively and together with other evidence, (e.g., lay statements) in the Veteran’s record.
In some cases, an opinion based on record review only may be sufficient. In other cases, a current examination may be required. When an opinion only is initially requested, the examiner should be informed that an examination will be scheduled if the examiner believes it is necessary in order to render the requested medical opinion.
When the opinion is completed and returned to the regional office, rating personnel should ensure that the examiner has identified the specific evidence reviewed and considered when forming the opinion, provided a rationale for the opinion, and stated his/her conclusions using one of the legally recognized phrases.
When rating a disability due to an in-service exposure event, it is imperative that raters adhere to the principles relating to service connection set forth in 38 CFR § 3.303. Because scientific studies regarding health effects from exposures are in the preliminary stages, raters should carefully review the nature, dates, and locations of the Veteran’s military service, and apply the law under a broad and liberal manner, consistent with all available facts and circumstances. Claims should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis with evidentiary weight given to medical examinations and opinions from both private and VA physicians. In all cases, the benefit of the doubt shall be given to the Veteran. 38 CFR § 3.102.
Claims based on Southwest Asia Service (38 CFR § 3.317)
Regulations governing claims based on undiagnosed illnesses, and medically unexplained chronic multisymptom illnesses that were promulgated following the initial 1990-1991 Gulf War continue to be in effect for any Veteran with Southwest Asia service. Regional office personnel are reminded that the provisions of 38 CFR § 3.317 should be applied when rating claims for disabilities due to environmental hazards in the Southwest Asia theater, if the following applies:
• The Veteran claims a disability due to an environmental hazard while serving on active military, naval, or air service in the Southwest Asia theater of operations from August 2, 1990, through a date yet to be finally determined;
• The medical evidence reveals an undiagnosed illness, or a diagnosed condition without conclusive etiology; and
• The medical evidence does not provide a sufficient link to Veteran’s military service.
If the above scenario is presented, the claim should be developed under the Gulf War and Southwest Asia service procedures outlined in Training Letter 10-01, released February 4, 2010. (See “What to Include in a VA Examination or Medical Opinion Request”, above).
Independent Medical Opinions (§3.328)
If there are complex or controversial medical issues involved in the rating of disabilities claimed as a result of environmental exposures, an advisory opinion can be obtained from non-VA medical experts. Requests for this type of opinion are initiated by the regional office and submitted through the Veterans Service Center Manager to C&P Service for approval. The request must detail the reasons why the opinion is necessary.
Note: These are special requests and not the same as requesting a VA physician to express an opinion on a VA examination.
About the Fact Sheet
The VA notes that the Fact Sheet is not meant to “influence examiners rendering opinions concerning the etiology of any particular disability, but rather to ensure that such opinions are fully informed based on all known objective facts.” The VA asks the examiner to utilize the Fact Sheet along with other evidence in the Veteran’s record.
Become a Premium Member
To more fully understand how military service may be linked to your current health conditions, become a VetsHQ Premium Member and complete a comprehensive assessment of all of your current health conditions on the VetsHQ Compensation tab, and see the full range of other benefits you earned through your military service. Membership is just $2.99 a month or $19.99 a year.MAKE ME A PREMIUM MEMBER >