BACK

 

RAO Bulletin Update
1 February 2005


This Bulletin Update Contains the Following Articles:

•	CRDP Update 31 …………………………  (100% Disabled w/IU chances now 50-50)
•	Budget Shortfalls Blamed on Retirees by Pentagon ………. (Veteran groups 
outraged)
•	Legislation of Interest Update 04…………………………… (109th Congress Vet 
bills)
•	VA Compensation Levels Inconsistent …………………. (Award levels by state 
differ)
•	BRAC 2005 Update 03 ……………………………….. (Latest proposed base closings)
•	Depleted Uranium (DU): ………………………………... (Compensation for exposure)
•	SBP DIC Offset Update 1 ……………………………………... (Elimination proposed)
•	SBP Paid Up Provision Update 1 ………………………….. (2005 vice 2008 proposed)
•	SGLI Update 04 ………………………………………... (Increased coverage proposed)
•	Vet Cemetery Georgia ………………………………… (Opening in late 2005 planned)
•	VA Laser Eye Surgery Update 01 ……………………………….. (No longer available)
•	National Retired Military Golf Classic …………………….. (31 MAY thru 03 JUN 
05)
•	AF Recognition Ribbon ………………………………... (Eligibility to wear expanded)
•	Atomic Vet’s Info …………………………………………. (Obtaining info for claims)
•	Diet Slim Chance 2004 Awards ……………………….... (Year’s worst diet 
gimmicks)


CRDP Update 31:  Despite rumors to the contrary, the Pentagon has made 
no final decision on paying full concurrent receipt of military retired 
and disability pay to veterans with non-combat disabilities rated at 
100% solely because they are unemployable. An e-mail circulating among 
military retirees claims there was a 28 JAN announcement from the Defense 
Department that retirees who are rated fully disabled solely because 
the Department of Veterans Affairs has determined they are unable to work 
will not get full concurrent receipt that will go to other disabled 
retirees who have formal 100% disability ratings. Defense personnel, 
finance center and public affairs officials said 31 JAN that there was no 
such announcement and that no decision has been made. Since late October, 
Pentagon officials have been trying to decide how to apply a provision 
of the 2005 Defense Authorization Act (now Public Law 108-375) that 
promised to immediately end the offset in retired pay for all 100% 
disabled military retirees, without forcing them to wait the nine remaining 
years of an originally planned 10-year phase out of the offset. One clear 
result, which will appear in retiree paychecks this week, is that 
veterans with non-combat disabilities rated at 100% no longer have their 
military retired pay reduced because they are also receiving veterans’ 
disability compensation. About 15,000 retirees are getting extra money in 
their 1 FEB retirement checks because of this change. Still to be 
determined is what happens to the additional 15,000 retirees who have formal 
disability ratings of less than 100% but are considered unemployable by 
the VA.  In December, defense officials sent a letter to the White 
House saying that unless the White House objected, they intended to treat 
veterans with what the VA calls “individual unemployability” the same as 
other 100% disabled veterans. The White House’s Office of Management 
and Budget, which received the notice, did not raise any objections, but 
a final policy decision still has not been made and the Defense Finance 
and Accounting Service, which cuts retiree paychecks, has not received 
any order to make payments. In December and early January, defense 
officials working on the unemployability question were optimistic that the 
retirees ultimately would receive the payments. Now, as the final 
decision has lagged, they are less sure. One official working on the issue 
put the odds at 50-50 either way. He said that if this were a sure 
thing, the pay order would already have gone out.  If a decision is made to 
cover the unemployable disabled retirees, they would be entitled to 
payments effective 1 JAN 05, the same as other disabled retirees. There 
appears to be no timetable for making a final decision. Officials said 
there is some talk among policymakers about punting the issue back to 
Congress because it was a lack of clarity in the 2005 Defense 
Authorization Act that led to the current impasse. If Congress has to pass a new 
law clarifying coverage, officials say that would likely delay payments 
[Source: Navy Times Rick Maze article 31 JAN 05] 


BUDGET SHORTFALLS BLAMED ON RETIREES:  The 25 JAN 05 Wall Street 
Journal issue carried a front-page story "As Benefits for Veterans Climb, 
Military Spending Feels Freeze." The story talks about the arguments made 
by Pentagon officials that military retirees are taking budget money 
that military leaders want to use to help troops fighting today. It noted 
the assertions of  Dr. David Chu who is the Pentagon's Undersecretary 
for Personnel and Readiness during their interview. He stated  that the 
amounts have gotten to the point where they are hurtful. They are 
taking away from the nation's ability to defend itself and improving retiree 
and survivor benefits does not affect active duty retention.  The story 
asserts that Congress, feeling the pressure by veterans groups has 
boosted retiree and survivor benefits including TRICARE For Life, 
concurrent receipt, and SBP.  It is difficult to believe that the words of Dr. 
Hue are the official position of the Pentagon or just a case of foot in 
mouth disease. However, after six days the Pentagon’s public relations 
office has not made any news releases that commented on or disputed Dr. 
Chu’s assertions which have enraged veteran groups throughout the 
country.  
     Issues about military benefits should be publicly aired, but 
assertions that increased spending on benefits for military retirees and 
widows is taking money from weapons or other active duty funding needs or 
off base.  Congress over the past two years has passed legislation 
specifying that no money for TRICARE For Life or concurrent receipt is to 
come out of the DoD budget, but is to come from elsewhere in the 
Treasury.  Regarding retention the Joint Chiefs of Staff fought to repeal 
retirement cuts in the late 1990s after those cuts were found to be 
contributing to serious retention and readiness problems. The Joint Chiefs 
also told Congress at the time that they supported retiree health care 
fixes, because active duty troops know that they'll be retired someday, 
too. The troops are smart and can see through a "give them bonuses now 
and cut their future benefits" philosophy; that's exactly what gave rise 
to the retention and readiness crises of the late 1970s and late 1990s, 
after years of erosion of benefits.  Congress has demonstrated time and 
again that it will provide funding to meet the needs of both our active 
duty forces and our military retirees and survivors. If any 
Administration chooses to impose internal funding limitations or budget trade-offs 
that is in direct conflict with the intent of statutes passed by 
Congress and signed into law that were written specifically to prevent that 
from happening. The WSJ article points out why the Military Coalition of 
fraternal organizations have a responsibility to help ensure that 
retention lessons learned under previous administrations aren't lost as 
leadership changes, independent of any particular Administration's 
budget-driven proposals. VADM Ryan's (President of the MOAA) recently wrote an 
article on this issue in their magazine titled “Freedom Isn’t Free” 
which addresses precisely that point.  It can be read at 
www.moaa.org/Magazine/CurrentEdition/presidents_page.asp. The Wall Street Journal 
article can be viewed at 
http://webreprints.djreprints.com/1156160669825.html . [Source: Various 
JAN 05]


LEGISLATION OF INTEREST UPDATE 04: With the start of the 109th Congress 
a number of bills have already been introduced in the House and Senate. 
Here is a summary of those bills of interest to veterans: 

S. 11 (Sen. Levin, D-MI) is an omnibus bill that would increase Army 
and Marine Corps strengths, provide tax credits to employers of mobilized 
Guard/Reserve members, increase the military death gratuity to 
$100,000, eliminate the DIC offset to SBP, accelerate the 2008 effective date 
of SBP, and provide additional health coverage options to all Selected 
Reserve members, among other provisions.

S. 13 A bill to overhaul veterans’ health care benefits.

S. 42 (Sen. Allen, R-VA) and S. 44 (Sen. Hagel, R-NE) would both raise 
the death gratuity to $100,000 for members killed on active duty since 
9/11.

S. 43 (Sen. Hagel, R-NE) would end the $1200 enrollment fee for the 
Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB), refund the fee to MGIB-participating members on 
active duty, and offer an new enrollment opportunity to all 
non-participating active duty members.

S. 77 (Sen. Sessions, R-AL) would increase maximum military life 
insurance coverage from $250,000 to $400,000 of which the first $150,000 
would be premium-free for members serving in combat zones and raise the 
military death gratuity to $100,000 for servicemembers killed in combat.

S. 121 (Sen. DeWine, R-OH) would increase the death gratuity to 
$100,000 for the surviving spouse plus $25,000 for each surviving child, 
authorize free TRICARE Prime eligibility for surviving children until the 
age of 18 or 22 (if enrolled in school), double the education benefit for 
surviving children, and increase DIC to $1500 per month for an eligible 
surviving spouse plus $750 per month for each surviving child.

S. 185, the Military Retiree Survivor Equity Act, would end the 
deduction of VA survivor benefits (paid when the member’s death is caused by a 
service-connected condition) from the survivor’s SBP annuity. It also 
would move up the 2008 effective date of 30-year paid-up SBP coverage to 
a 2005 implementation.

H.R. 97 (Rep. Sam Graves, R-MO) would limit interest rates to 36 
percent for consumer credit extended to a service member or a service 
member’s dependent. If passed, the measure would authorize a fine or up to one 
year imprisonment (or both) for lenders who violate the interest cap.  
The legislation was introduced in response to reports that some lending 
agencies target military personnel with promises of quick and easy 
loans and are able to charge interest rates as high as 390 percent. By 
contrast service members are able to obtain loans from credit unions with 
18 percent interest. 

H.R. 292 (Rep. Spencer Bauchus (Ala.) would also increase the benefit 
paid to survivors to $100,000. The measure is being considered by the 
House Armed Services Committee and currently has 157 cosponsors

H.R. 303 (Rep. Bilirakis, R-FL) would eliminate the disability offset 
to military retired pay effective 1 JAN 06 for all members with a 
service-connected disability who had sufficient service to retired 
independent of any disability.

H.R. 333 (Rep. Lynch, D-MA) would protect education status and 
financial interests of servicemembers called to active duty while enrolled in 
college courses.

H.R. 377 (Rep. Everett, R-AL) is the House companion bill to Sen. 
Sessions’ S. 77.

You can track cosponsorship, current status, and other information on 
selected bills of interest at: http://capwiz.com/moaa/issues/bills/.  
You can also send your legislators suggested messages urging their 
support via this site by simply entering your ZIP code in the appropriate 
block. [Source: Various JAN 05]


VA COMPENSATION LEVELS INCONSISTENT:  Bush’s nominee (Jim Nicholson) to 
run the Department of Veterans Affairs, pledged he would work to ensure 
that veterans across the country are given the same treatment, 
regardless of where they live.  During the Senate hearings he said it was a 
"real issue" that veterans in different states are awarded different 
levels of compensation. The reasons for those differences, however, are 
still something of a mystery. Responding to questions Nicholson said he was 
still examining the issue and was waiting for the inspector general's 
assessment on the topic. He made the comments in testimony to the Senate 
Veterans' Affairs Committee. Nicholson previously was chairman of the 
Republican National Committee and most recently served as U.S. 
ambassador to the Vatican. The issue of state-by-state variation stems from 
figures compiled by the VA that show veterans in some states getting far 
higher annual payments than veterans in other states. For example, 
according to the VA's most recent annual the average payment for disability 
compensation is $7,861 yet veterans in New Mexico receive an average of 
$10,851 and veterans in Ohio only receive an average $6,710. The 
regional differences have erupted as a significant issue in Illinois, which 
ranks near the bottom of the average payment lists. There is an annual 
difference of $5,000 between average disability compensation to veterans 
in Illinois versus payments to veterans in Puerto Rico, which has the 
highest average payments.  Chicago media, led by the Chicago Sun-Times, 
have reported extensively on the issue, and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., 
has flagged it as a major concern. The department's inspector general 
also has launched an examination of the issue.  Knight Ridder 
Newspapers, in a report last summer, also highlighted such disparities, 
particularly the percentage of veterans in each state who are part of the 
disability compensation system. Across the country, their analysis of VA data 
found, an estimated 572,000 U.S. veterans may not be receiving the 
compensation to which they're entitled from the federal government for 
disabilities suffered in the service of their country. There was also wide 
variation by state in the percentage of veterans who participate in the 
program. At the high end are states such as Alaska, New Mexico, 
Oklahoma and Texas, where 12% to 16% of veterans receive disability 
compensation payments. At the low end are Illinois, Iowa, Connecticut and 
Michigan, where 6% or 7% of veterans get compensation. The national average is 
9.9%. Many state governments have taken it upon themselves to find 
these uncompensated veterans. After Knight Ridder's story, legislation was 
introduced in July by Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., to require the VA to 
educate all veterans about the benefits due them. In the last Congress, 
no action was taken on Coleman's bill. But his spokesman say that the 
measure will be reintroduced. Disability payments, which now go to about 
2.5 million veterans, are designed to compensate veterans who suffer 
physical or mental injuries while serving in the armed services. 
Veterans’ experts say that demographic issues, over which the VA has little 
control, may explain some of the variation. Another possible explanation 
is that VA workers may be trained differently and therefore determine a 
veteran's level of disability differently. Nicholson stated that if he 
was confirmed it would be a "high priority" to better understand the 
regional disparities. Congress did confirm him in a 14-0 vote. He will 
replace Anthony Principi, who has served as leader of the agency since 
early in Bush's first term. [Source: Knight Ridder Newspaper article 24 
JAN 05]


BRAC 2005 UPDATE 03: In 1988 the Secretary of Defense recognized the 
requirement to close excess bases to save money and therefore chartered 
the Commission on Base Realignment and Closure in 1988 to recommend 
military bases within the United States for realignment and closure.  
According to a knowledgeable official who spoke to Armed Forces News on 
grounds of anonymity, as of mid-December the following bases were being 
considered under the Base Realignment and Closure round of 2005.  It 
should be empathized that the final decision on whether or not the bases on 
this list will close has NOT been made: 

BRAC 2005 - Air Force Bases: Altus AFB, Oklahoma; Beale AFB, 
California; Brooks AFB, Texas; Cannon AFB, New Mexico; Columbus AFB, Mississippi; 
Ellsworth AFB, South Dakota; Goodfellow AFB, Texas; Grand Forks AFB, 
North Dakota; Hanscom AFB, Massachusetts; Kirtland AFB, New Mexico; Los 
Angeles AFB, California; McConnell AFB, Kansas; Nellis AFB, Nevada (to 
realign); Seymour Johnson AFB (to realign), North Carolina; Shaw AFB, 
South Carolina; and Vance AFB, Oklahoma.

BRAC 2005 - Army Bases: Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania; Detroit 
Arsenal, Michigan; 
Fort Belvoir, Virginia; Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico; Fort 
McPherson/Gillem, Georgia; Fort Monmouth, New Jersey; Fort Monroe, Virginia; Fort 
Polk (to realign), Louisiana; Fort Richardson, Alaska; Fort Sam Houston, 
Texas; Fort Shafter, Hawaii; Lima Army Tank Plant, Ohio; Natick Soldier 
Center, Massachusetts; Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey; Redstone Arsenal, 
Alabama; Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois; Sierra Army Depot, California; 
and Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona. 

BRAC 2005 - Marine Bases: Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, California; 
Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany, Georgia; Marine Corps Logistics 
Base Barstow, California (realignment); Marine Corps Mountain Warfare 
School, California; Marine Corps Recruit Depot San Diego, California 
(realign or close); and Marine Reserve Support Unit, Kansas City.

BRAC 2005 - Naval Bases: Ingleside Naval Station, Texas; Naval Air 
Engineering Station Lakehurst, New Jersey; Naval Air Station Meridian, 
Mississippi; Naval Postgraduate School, California; Naval Recreation 
Station Solomons Island; Naval Surface Warfare Center Crane, Indiana; Naval 
Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division, Virginia; Navy Supply Corps 
School, Georgia; New Orleans Naval Support Activity, Louisiana; 
Pascagoula Naval Station, Mississippi; Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, New 
Hampshire; and Saratoga Springs Naval Support Unit, New York.
[Source: Armed Forces News 21 JAN 05]


DEPLETED URANIUM (DU):   DU is a radioactive by-product of uranium 
enrichment used to coat ammunition such as tank shells and "bunker busting" 
missiles because its density makes it ideal for piercing armor. In the 
manufacture of tank and bunker busting shells/missiles depleted 
uranium, non-depleted uranium, titanium and tungsten all meet the dense metal 
criteria.  However, titanium and tungsten are not normally used as they 
are more expensive than depleted uranium which is in abundance. The 
world uranium industry has over one million tons of depleted uranium to 
dispose of.  Tungsten is difficult to manufacture because it is 1.75 
times harder than uranium and has a much higher melting point at 3422 
degrees Celsius than depleted uranium at1132 degrees Celsius. Moreover, 
depleted uranium is preferred because it burns fiercely in air making it 
effective as an incendiary device. Uranium can be engineered to be 
"self-sharpening" so that when it hits a target, it retains its punching 
point as material erodes off the warhead. Titanium and tungsten will not do 
this. Uranium’s molecular structure can re-formed, using metallurgical 
and "nano-technologies" to deliver a selected range of ballistic 
features, including kinetic, thermal, pyrophoric, liquid metal and 
high-pressure/high-heat, plasma effects.  Uranium (whether NDU or DU) offers 
unique structural features and the chemistry best suited for the defeat of 
deep, bunkerized targets, multiple types of targets in area denial 
munitions, and penetrating composite ceramic and metal armored targets.
     Thousands of DU shells and bombs have been used in Yugoslavia, 
Afghanistan, the 1990-91 Gulf war and the ongoing conflict in Iraq.  
Scientists say even a tiny particle of DU can have disastrous results once 
ingested, including various cancers and degenerative diseases, 
paralysis, birth deformities and death.  DU has a half-life of 4.5 billion 
years, meaning it takes that long for just half of its atoms to decay.  The 
radiation released through DU use in conflicts is believed to be more 
than ten times the amount dispersed by atmospheric testing.  According 
to Terry Jemison at the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), of the 
more than 592,560 discharged personnel who served in the 1990-91 Gulf 
war, at least 179,310 - one third - are receiving disability compensation 
and over 24,760 cases were pending by in September 2004.  A sixth of 
the Iraq war veterans have already sought treatment.  This does not 
include personnel still active and receiving care from the military, or 
those who have died.  And among 168,528 veterans of the current conflict in 
Iraq who have left active duty, 16% (27,571) had already sought 
treatment from the VA by July 2004. These figures cover a variety of service 
connected medical conditions and none of this has been attributed to DU 
use.  However, those who have served in these areas seem to have 
increased susceptibility to the symptoms of exposure.  If you served in these 
conflicts and are experiencing any of the symptoms of ingesting DU you 
should consider submitting a disability claim to the VA and be 
evaluated. [Source: New Mexico e-Veterans News  15 JAN 05 ++]

 
SBP DIC OFFSET UPDATE 1:  Survivors of members who die of 
service-connected causes are entitled to Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) 
of $993 per month for a survivor without children from the VA. The 
surviving spouse’s SBP annuity is reduced by the DIC amount. A pro-rated 
share of SBP premiums is refunded to the widow upon the member’s death, 
but with no interest. No survivors of civilian retirees who are also 
disabled military veterans and die of a military-service-connected cause 
must forfeit their purchased survivor benefits to receive DIC. For 
members killed on active duty since 24 NOV 04, a surviving spouse with 
children can avoid the dollar-for-dollar offset by assigning SBP to the 
children. But that forces the spouse to give up any SBP claim after the 
children attain their majority leaving the spouse with only $993 a month 
from the VA. Currently, 53,000 widows have some level of SBP offset. 
Sen. Bill Nelson and Rep. Henry Brown, sponsors of legislation to 
eliminate reduction of SBP by the amount of VA Dependency and Indemnity 
Compensation (DIC) payments for the past four years, have introduced bills 
combining the issue with paid-up SBP. [Source: MOAA Leg Up 29 JAN 05] 


SBP PAID UP PROVISION UPDATE 1: The Strom Thurmond National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999, signed into law as Public Law 
105-261 on 17 Oct 98, authorized a paid-up provision to SBP for retirees. 
The law states that, effective 1 Oct 08, no reduction may be made in the 
retired pay of a participant in the Plan for any month after the later 
of the 360th month of retired pay reduction and the month during which 
the participant attains 70 years of age. Thus, beginning with the 
retired pay entitlement and SBP coverage in effect for the month of October 
2008, SBP premium reductions shall no longer be made from the retired 
pay of qualified participants. The first payment affected would be the 
payment normally due in NOV 08. Enrollment in the RSFPP, the earlier 
annuity program sponsored by the military, will not be counted in 
determining the qualifying SBP enrollment period. Only SBP participation, which 
began 21 Sep 72, will be used for this purpose. Public Law 106-65, 
signed into law 5 OCT 99, extended the paid-up provision to active RSFPP 
participants. That law states that, effective 1 OCT 08, no reduction may 
be made in the retired pay of an RSFPP participant for any month after 
the later of the 360th month of retired pay reduction and the month 
during which the participant attains 70 years of age.
     Sen. Jon Corzine (D-NJ) and Rep. Jim Saxton (R-NJ), who have 
previously sponsored bills to accelerate implementation of paid-up SBP, have 
agreed to join Sen. Bill Nelson and Rep. Henry Brown as primary 
cosponsors of their respective bills in the 109th Congress to accelerate the 
30 year paid up provision to a 2005 implementation date. About 135,000 
retirees would benefit from an earlier effective date of paid-up SBP. 
The basic statutory provisions of SBP law are in Chapter 73, Title 10, 
United States Code. [Source: MOAA Leg Up 29 JAN 05]


SGLI UPDATE 04: Senator Jeff Sessions (Ala.), a member of the Senate 
Armed Services Committee, has introduced legislation S. 77 that would 
dramatically expand death benefits for military survivors.  Senator Joseph 
Lieberman (CT) is a chief co-sponsor of the bill.  Senator Sessions 
stated that the bill would increase the Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance 
(SGLI) maximum benefit to $400,000 from its current maximum of 
$250,000. Of that coverage $150,000 would be provided at no cost to service 
members once they enter a combat zone. There is no free coverage under 
current law. The legislation would also raise the death gratuity from 
$12,420 for military personnel killed in combat to $100,000 and the death 
gratuity increase would be retroactive to cover those killed while 
deployed in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. 
Combined, the three increases would cost about $460 million, and it is 
unclear where the money would come from. [Source: FRA News Bytes 15 JAN 05]


VET CEMETERY GEORGIA:  This planned 775-acre Georgia site is located in 
Cherokee County approximately 40 miles north of Atlanta.  Nearly 
400,000 veterans and their families live within 75 miles of the cemetery.  
Currently there are no open national cemeteries in Georgia.  The two 
closest open VA national cemeteries are Chattanooga National Cemetery, 118 
miles away in Tennessee, and Fort Mitchell National Cemetery, 130 miles 
away in Alabama.  The 135-acre initial construction phase calls for 
29,000 full-casket gravesites, consisting of both pre-placed crypts and 
traditional casket gravesites, plus a 3,000-unit columbarium and 3,000 
burial sites for cremated in-ground remains.  The plan also includes 
construction of an administration and maintenance complex, three committal 
service shelters, a public information center with electronic gravesite 
locator and public restrooms, a cemetery entrance area, flag assembly 
area, memorial walkway and donations area and infrastructure elements 
including roadways, landscaping, utilities and irrigation.  The $27.7 
million contract has been awarded to a company in Marietta Georgia and 
burials are expected to begin by late 2005 in an initial burial site to 
allow burials while cemetery is under construction.  Information on the 
Georgia National Cemetery is available by calling (770) 479-9300.  
[Source: Air Force Retiree News 19 JAN 05]


VA LASER EYE SURGERY UPDATE 01: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 
has ended a five-month-old policy that permitted optometrists to 
perform laser eye surgery at its health care facilities under the supervision 
of ophthalmologists. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs decision was a 
reluctant one but experts could not come up with an implementation plan 
agreeable to both specialties. Traditionally, ophthalmologists perform 
eye surgery, while optometrists conduct visual examinations.  In VA, 
health professionals can only perform services identified by professional 
licenses issued by each state.  Oklahoma is the only state in the 
nation that licenses properly trained optometrists in their state to perform 
laser eye surgery.  In August, VA began permitting optometrists with 
licenses authorizing laser eye surgery to perform those procedures under 
the supervision of an ophthalmologist.  However, a VA panel with 
representatives from both professions has been unable to reach an agreement 
on how this supervision would actually take place. VA currently operates 
157 hospitals, 134 nursing homes, 42 residential rehabilitation 
treatment programs, and 862 outpatient clinics.  The new policy is effective 
immediately at all facilities providing laser eye surgery. [Source: VA 
News Release 18 DEC 04]


NATIONAL RETIRED MILITARY GOLF CLASSIC:  The 22nd National Retired 
Military Golf Classic will be held in Myrtle Beach, S.C., from 31 May to 04 
June 2005.  The tournament will be played on five different courses at 
the Myrtle Beach National and Wildwing Golf Clubs.  Only 864 men and 
132 women will be accepted for this event, which NRMGC officials say is 
the largest retired military golf event in the world.   More than 
$125,000 in cash and prizes will be awarded.  Applications were mailed in 
December to those on the mailing list.  Applications are also available at 
many military golf courses around the country.  Priority is given to 
those who have played previously in the classic.  After 1 FEB acceptance 
will be on a first come first served basis.  A waiting list will be 
established once the tournament is full.  For applications call 1 (800) 
255-4763 or 1 (866) 469-7853 or write to NRMGC, PO Box 3608, Myrtle Beach 
SC 29578.  [Source: Air Force Retiree News 11 JAN 05] 


AF RECOGNITION RIBBON:  Eligibility to wear this ribbon has been 
expanded. This ribbon was initially authorized by the Chief of Staff, U.S. 
Air Force on 12 OCT 80.  It is awarded to named individual Air Force 
recipients of special trophies and awards except the 12 Outstanding Airmen 
of the Year nominees. A change to AFI 36-2805, “Special Trophies and 
Awards,” allows members of small teams participating in events such as 
security forces’ Defender Challenge, Air Mobility Command Rodeo or the 
William Tell competition at Air Combat Command to wear the Air Force 
Recognition Ribbon. A small team is defined as below flight level. Examples 
include a team for a specific event, an airlift or missile crew of the 
year, or a weapons load crew. Although the official implementation date 
for the policy change was 6 DEC 04 eligibility under the revised 
criteria is retroactive to the inception date of the ribbon in 1980. [Source: 
Armed Forces News 7 JAN 04]


ATOMIC VET’S INFO:  In the late forties, all through the fifties, and 
into the early sixties the United States exploded many nuclear devices 
into our atmosphere.  Information regarding these tests was formerly 
classified which made it difficult for many vets to pursue claims against 
the government. Much has now been declassified and is available.  If 
you are a vet who has had even one exposure to atmospheric testing of 
nuclear devices you may be eligible for a service connected disability, or 
in some cases a lump sum settlement of $75,000.00 from the Department 
of Justice. Macular degeneration has now been recognized as a possible 
cause and effect of ionizing radiation exposure. If you are an Atomic 
vet looking for advice on how to proceed with a claim Richard U. Conant 
[health permitting] can get you started in the right direction. Richard 
was very active in pursuing veteran entitlements related to radiation 
exposure for many years and is a wealth of information on the effects of 
radiation exposure to vets as a result of his extensive research over 
the years to file claims.  He is an Atomic vet himself, visually 
challenged, and a survivor of some cancers. He can be reached at 
rucon1@juno.com.  The following web sites can also provide useful info 
on the subject:
•	National Association of Atomic Veterans www.naav.com
•	Atomic Veterans of America www.angelfire.com/tx/atomicveteran
•	Atomic Veterans History Project www.aracnet.com/~pdxavets
•	VA Ionizing Radiation Information www.va.gov/IRAD
•	VA Project 112 www1.va.gov/SHAD/
[Source:  New Mexico e-Veterans News25 JAN 05]

Lt. James "EMO" Tichacek, USN (Ret) 
Director, Retiree Assistance Office & U.S. Embassy Warden Baguio City 
RP 
PSC 517 Box RCB, FPO AP 96517-1000 
Tel: 1 (760) 839-9003 or FAX to email service 1 (801) 760-2430 
Email: raoemo@sbcglobal.net (U.S.) or raoemo@mozcom.com (R.P.) 
Web: http://post_119_gulfport_ms.tripod.com/rao1.html 
AL/AMVETS/CORMV/DAV/FRA/NAUS/NCOA/PRA/TROA/USDR/VFW/VVA/CG33/DD890/AD37 
member 
NOTE: To subscribe, submit email addee change, or unsubscribe:
1.	To subscribe provide your full name plus either the 
post/branch/chapter number of the fraternal military/government organization you are 
currently affiliated with (if any) "AND/OR" the city and state/country 
you reside in so your addee can be properly positioned in the directory 
for future recovery.
2.	To submit change of email addee provide your old and new email addee 
plus full name. 
3.	To unsubscribe click "Reply" and add "Remove" to the subject line.

_____________________________
Unsubscribe: http://www.ymlp.com/u.php?raoemo+amlg327@yahoo.com
Hosting 
by http://www.yourmailinglistprovider.com