The Branan Report

The American public was deceptively misled by those who told everyone it was just volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the drinking water at Camp Lejeune. Sufficient evidence points to Hillary Clinton and her involvement in the Camp Lejeune Water Contamination scandal, which explains why former President Obama politically intervened in an illegal process to undercut 3,700 (Marines) Federal Tort Claims.”

Mr. Brannon,                                                              

Thank you for bringing this issue to my attention.  I intend to work with the Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Rep. Trey Gowdy, to properly investigate the issue of environmental issues at Camp Lejeune, to include a cover-up by the Obama Administration. Once again, thank you for this notification.  I wish you and your family the best. We must honor those who serve and their families.  You deserve better then this.

With kind regards, I remain

Sincerely,

Rob Wittman

Member of Congress

Let me assure you that the scope of the health risk to Camp Lejeune occupants (1950s to present) far exceeds the provisions and time frame of the “Janey Ensminger Act” and the “Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 2012.”

These acts were mis-interpreted and deceptively misleading. This case unpacks the largest environmental cover-up in U.S. history and involves Obstruction of Justice, Perjury, Waste, Fraud and Abuse, Mismanagement, Environmental crimes, Constitutional Rights violations, and a series of other violations of the law.

New evidence points to those who severely and systematically influenced the outcome of these Acts which ultimately led Veterans Administration (VA) officials to wrongly deny my VA benefit claims and continually denying my appeals. In order to ensure this issue is properly addressed it will also require the Justice Department to properly act.

Among other key findings identified, rules have been violated which constitutes discipline of those responsible for generating false details in the above acts stipulating only the period from January 1, 1957 to December 31, 1987.

Summary of Concern

I have continued efforts to remedy the circumstance of contamination at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina through means of reporting and attempts at litigation. However, I have been rebuffed at every turn. I am contacting officials once again in yet another attempt to document and remedy this problem, and to shed further light on a dangerous situation that has persisted for an unreasonable number of years.

In effect, I request a Congressional Inquiry be reopened pursuant to prior discussions by contacting the Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep.Trey Gowdy. Such an inquiry must be documented and borne out completely in order to respond appropriately and to act upon two previous inquiries, Marine Corps and VA responses to which fell short.

Specifically, I request this information be provided to members of the Supreme Court, President Trump and his advisors must be apprised of this issue, and insist on the repeal and amendment or replacement of the Janey Ensminger Act and the Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Act.

Moreover, and ironically, the person who drafted responses to inquiry, Col. Bew, has now moved on to the position of Director of Legislative Affairs Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Background

A detailed overview of the documentation of my claims, my findings and the records I have submitted appear below.

My wife, father in-law, sons, and I were exposed to nuclear and radiological contaminants during our tour at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina from 1989 to 1991. Our exposure to these contaminants involves not only my family’s loss of life, health, and related financial hardship resulting from treatment, but also the Veterans Administration (VA) rating actions of July 2010, which denied service connection for the thyroid disorders and asthma related issues associated with nuclear/radiological exposure and entitlement to service connection for residuals of multiple same-thyroid cancers in my family, which the VA excluded from its Camp Lejeune disability compensation list.

The VA is apparently now compensating victims of contaminated Camp Lejeune water
but not victims of exposure to other environmental hazards unspecified by previous CDC/ATSDR documentation or reporting, radiological contamination among these. The issue at hand, then, is the excessively narrow scope that excludes nuclear/radiologically associated afflictions.

Both these acts specify an overly restrictive time-frame of eligibility by which they exclude a large number of military families who were exposed to nuclear/radiological and biological contaminants over a longer period of time in the same locations as the water contamination. In fact, the DAV National Appeals Officer findings document ethical and moral failing’s incident to the wrongful influence of powerful national politicians and defense legal advisors. Such documented malfeasance seriously impugns the intentions behind the exclusion of these hazards.

In closing, I wish to observe that in nine months there have been three stays to the current administration’s immigration policy on behalf of people who look to steal entrance into this country faithlessly. By contrast, in almost a decade not a single court case has upheld a challenge to the exclusion of nuclear/radiological or biological exposure at Camp Lejeune from compensable service-connected illnesses incurred by Marines who served this country faithfully.

Issue of Contention:

My intent was to find out who and what caused harm to my family. The issue of water contamination at Camp Lejeune due to volatile organic compounds (VOC) is well documented and little action has been taken to assist military personnel and families

This action derives from the “Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 2012,” and the associated environmental and medical matters section of the act (Title I), known separately as the “Janey Ensminger Act.”

As tragic as the issue has been for those involved, it addresses only a fraction of the time period, scope, and level of risk truly faced by U.S. Marines and families who lived, and still live at Camp Lejeune (CLNC).

The Janey Ensminger Act wrongly applies to only fifteen (15) specific maladies experienced by people assigned to Camp Lejeune during a thirty (30) year period between 1957 and 1987, due to findings that these maladies were linkable to the water contamination, which ostensibly occurred only during these years.

In addition to the proven documented causes addressed by Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 2012, numerous other more dangerous vectors were present during and beyond that 30-year period until at least 2012 and to the present.

Ample documentation of these carcinogenic vectors, including deadly ionizing radiation, exists in public record and on-line, but none of them appear to have been publicly acknowledged by the EPAs CDC/ATSDR or any other reports in relation to the abnormal rates of auto-immune thyroid cancers and birth defects among Camp Lejeune residents.

The remainder of this document will describe and categorically document those vectors, remediation efforts or the lack thereof, and findings which point to systematic attempts to obscure evidence of environmental and health hazards while concurrently failing to disclose them properly.

My wife, father in-law, sons, and I were exposed to nuclear and radiological contaminants during our tour at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina from 1989 to 1991. Our exposure to these contaminants involves not only my family’s loss of life, health, and related financial hardship resulting from treatment, but also the Veterans Administration (VA) rating actions of July 2010, which denied service connection for the thyroid disorders and asthma related issues associated with nuclear/radiological exposure and entitlement to service connection for residuals of multiple same-thyroid cancers in my family, which the VA excluded from its Camp Lejeune disability compensation list.

The VA is apparently now compensating victims of contaminated Camp Lejeune water
but not victims of exposure to other environmental hazards unspecified by previous CDC/ATSDR documentation or reporting, radiological contamination among these.

The issue at hand, then, is the excessively narrow scope that excludes nuclear/radiologically associated afflictions. Both these acts specify an overly restrictive time-frame of eligibility by which they exclude a large number of military families who were exposed to nuclear/radiological and biological contaminants over a longer period of time in the same locations as the water contamination.

In fact, the DAV National Appeals Officer findings document ethical and moral failing’s incident to the wrongful influence of powerful national politicians and defense legal advisors.

Such documented malfeasance seriously impugns the intentions behind the exclusion of these hazards. In closing, I wish to observe that in nine months there have been three stays to the current administration’s immigration policy on behalf of people who look to steal entrance into this country faithlessly.

By contrast, in almost a decade not a single court case has upheld a challenge to the exclusion of nuclear/radiological or biological exposure at Camp Lejeune from compensable service-connected illnesses incurred by Marines who served this country faithfully.

Beyond water contamination, the facts of these dangers were evidently known. For this reason, I was disappointed to receive a copy of the defendants’ response to a Congressional inquiry from the Deputy, Legislative Assistant to the Commandant of the Marine Corps, a response issued more than six months after the required response time to a Congressional inquiry.

Rather than discuss known facts regarding the nuclear/radiological findings at Camp Lejeune, this response discussed only groundwater contamination issues. At the same time as these findings ratified the claims and resources available for those affected
by the Camp Lejeune water contamination, they also excluded mention of the very hazards that had afflicted my whole family.

Consequent to these wrongfully excluded hazards, the Department of Defense (DoD) announced it is “not accepting further litigation on Camp Lejeune contamination issues.” I am not a subject-matter expert on the federal legal system, but it appears a clear conflict of interest for one government agency potentially at fault for putting its personnel and families at grave risk continuously over an extended period of time to exercise the prerogative to choose whether or not it will accept legal responsibility resulting from a substantive lawsuit.

However, this is precisely what has been done ex post facto to forestall or otherwise prevent my own claim and potentially the claims of others.

At the time of the above-named “Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 2012,” and the associated environmental and medical matters section of the act (Title I), known separately as the “Janey Ensminger Act.”, VA officials had wrongly denied my VA benefit claim and appeals repeatedly.

In fact, they had done so since 2009 until, again, I initiated my most recent appeal in 2013. I believe the VA denied this wrongfully and that they have furthermore stonewalled to wait out time requirements made statutory since my original claim.

This legislation serves as de facto evidence of my rejected claims veracity. Indeed, there is no reason for a moratorium on legal action following my claim without belief that such claim be substantive. In fact, I am currently waiting for yet another (third) appeal review and decision of my 2013 appeal.

According to the VA, it won’t be until 2020 that my case will be reviewed again. Thus, after ten years of hiding risks from the public and of denial and delays, the same Acts and legislation that brought relief to a few also denied justice to others, including my sons, my wife, and to me.

From previous responses to inquiry, it is apparent that respondents had not considered any of the evidence I provided, except with a mind to deny nuclear/radiological and biological contamination by admitting to the contaminated drinking water. Some families thus achieved a minor victory with the passage of the Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act and Janey Ensminger Acts of 2012. That is, if one can consider a decades late, incomplete response after the death of Janey Ensminger to leukemia a “victory.” To us, it was more a Pyrrhic victory, signaling rather an overall defeat.

The need has thus become evident to advance to yet another level in seeking redress for our undue hardship. I am now appealing to executive authorities with the wherewithal to review the facts, reach a logical conclusion, and join in making every effort to ensure that the true danger and scope of damage of both nuclear/radiological and chemical contamination at Camp Lejeune.

This contamination greatly exceeds that of just the documented water contamination. If not only for my family and me but also for those still being exposed by these environmental threats, the American government must immediately recognize its duty to bring these hazards to light and remediate them before further hardship and tragedy can ensue.

By refusing to address the larger nuclear/radiological and biological contamination beyond that of the groundwater, the U.S. government continues to rob my family, and other veterans of the health care, VA benefits, and acknowledgement of their conditions that we have earned.

This dismissal of such a clear hazard certainly involves waste, fraud and abuse,
mismanagement, environmental crimes (hiding risks from the public), a series of violations of the law, negligence, loss of out of pocket financial, medical, human loss, my 401k, retirement savings, and consortium claims against the defendant. It’s my duty to protect my families interests and our Constitutional rights, particularly when the previous legal process has failed.

In reference to H.R. 2288: Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act of 2017, it has been taking six years on average for veterans to resolve an appeal for a disability claim with the VA, my claim has taken nearly ten years.  Perhaps Pres. Trump’s improvement should begin with this case.

This is a remedy for reviewing the legality of governmental and public servant conduct. Relative to Rule 611, 702 and 705, and punitive damages my assessment has identified outrageous misconduct and misbehavior and by law, monetary compensation must be awarded to an injured party that goes beyond which is necessary to compensate the individual for losses. It’s the law.

The remainder of this document will describe and categorically document those vectors, remediation efforts or the lack thereof, and findings which point to systematic attempts to obscure evidence of environmental and health hazards while concurrently failing to disclose them properly and timely.

My assessment reliably demonstrates that:

1. As a former U.S. Marine, my family and I were all exposed to various harmful environmental vectors not previously  known by the public, and this time, not in a combat zone, but in the assigned housing area (818 Tarawa Terrace Blvd) and surrounding on-post environs.  As a result of these conditions, I and all of my dependents have contracted the same specific or related maladies (cancers) at the same time. This is something our doctors (MD Anderson) have not seen before in any family.

2. These conditions were also known to the Department of the Army, Navy and Marine Corps at the time, and have been documented as hazards and violations both at the time of my exposure and since that time.

of these conditions, I and all of my dependents have contracted the same specific or related maladies (cancers) at the same time. This is something our doctors (MD Anderson) have not seen before in any family.

2. These conditions were also known to the Department of the Army, Navy and Marine Corps at the time, and have been documented as hazards and violations both at the time of my exposure and since that time.

3. Protracted inability to file legal cases over the past ten years regarding the serious illnesses and conditions of my family, and myself, is due to known federal legislative, political, and judicial interference of filing as a result of exposure to the contaminates at CLNC. (emphasis added)

4. Attempt to seek redress for all of our losses, which include our pending lawsuits from the defendants currently remains unsuccessful.

5. While I am prevented by yet another poorly written law called the Feres Doctrine, from seeking recompense for this negligent, or perhaps willful, exposure to hazardous conditions, my dependents are not similarly prohibited!

Attempts to pursue legal remedy have thus far been ineffective due to known political influence, and attorneys have been apprised that there is a reluctance to elevate this issue at a much higher level.

6. Reliable documentation I have compiled dating from the period of my family’s exposure up to the very recent past indicate an ongoing and documented situation, which has remained uncorrected up to the present. (emphasis added)

7. The impacts to myself and my family represents an ongoing public health hazard which has and will continue to affect tens of thousands of military personnel, their dependents, and in the guise of serious health impacts, including terminal illness, premature death, and or birth defects we experienced.

To date, no comprehensive remediation has been conducted, nor does it appear from the reliable documentation I have compiled that any comprehensive solution has or will be attempted.  Action must be taken. (emphasis added)

8. I have attempted to remedy this situation concerning the wrong information within the Janey Ensminger Act and the Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 2012 stipulation only the period of from January 1, 1957 to December 31, 1987.

This wrongly passed legislation signed by President Obama “Caring for Camp Lejeune Veterans Act of 2009 (S. 1518) through means of documented regulatory reporting and attempted litigation have been rebuffed in some manner at every avenue!

Congressional and Senate investigators must also act.  Some know about the decisions Obama made to cover up his renewable energy policy, which ironically involves Duke Energy “Camp Lejeune Solar Facility” which installed Fifty-Seven Thousand (57,000) Solar Panels costing tens of millions of dollars.

The “so what” to this is the amount of pay to play dealings that involves “Tens of Billions of Dollars” in an environmental infrastructure cover up, illegal fraud, and kickbacks schemes involving Hillary Clinton, and the Rad/Nuc cleanup contractors at Camp Lejeune when she had influence being the Chairman of the the Superfund Committee.  It involves at least two (2) million metric tons of deadly radioactive waste, which was found in in-ground dumps underneath the roadways.

9. Nearly a thousand (1,000) in-ground radioactive (carcinogenic) hazardous waste sites sat directly over the fresh water portion of both the Castle Hayne, and Tarawa Terrace water aquifers, and some are documented on top of water lines and very near water wells, never previously mentioned in any ATSDR report.  Many of these sites are on Tarawa Terrace, Holcomb Blvd. and Hadnot Point, Camp Johnson area.

The Wallace Creek Complex alone cost $10 Billion U.S. Tax Dollars and its where more than twelve new (Enlisted) Marine Barracks were built directly over these highly contaminated radioactive waste dumps.  These land use and development projects have systematically built over and covered up these radiological contaminated waste sites at Camp Lejeune with new infrastructure, i.e. roads, barracks, two communities, one elementary school, and some areas were (under deceptive remediation efforts in guise of potential archaeological sites), while some areas had no remediation efforts. (emphasis added)

10. It reveals more “Pay to Play” deals by Hillary Clinton who actually made large sums of money targeting this cold war environmental Superfund cleanup site, which is directly linked to both the Camp Lejeune scandal, and the Veterans Administration scandal which she stated is not a widespread problem.

• Giving favors in exchange for campaign contributions is just the tip of the iceberg.  NAVFAC contractors who previously contributed to Hilliary Clinton’s campaign in 2008, just happened to receive a $200 Million Dollar contract in 2012 to start the cleanup two million metric tons of radioactive waste at Camp Lejeune.  The waste sat directly under both the newly built Wallace Creek Regimental Complex where Marines live today, and under 6.5 miles of road infrastructure. (emphasis added)

11. Documented and abandoned dangerous Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) by-product (Radium 226) alpha/gamma ionizing radiation exposures from luminescent naval ship deck markers which still litter the public areas of Onslow Beach. (emphasis added)

12. Open-source reporting revealed previous Camp Lejeune Air Station UH-1 helicopters were fixed with the U.S. Army’s prototype Ultra Low Volume (ULV) Tactical Herbicide Spraying System, namely the (AA 45Y-1) Agent Orange Defoliant Dispenser, which sprayed large quantities of Agent Orange and Agent White (a more potent herbicide) on Camp Lejeune in 1971.

13. Multiple same EPA violations occurred concerning eighteen (18) years of airborne contamination releases, specifically (so called accidental) incinerated radioactive medical waste I-131 isotope constituents combined with dioxin (TCDD) generated by the U.S. Naval Hospital incinerator stack on Brewster Blvd.  Investigators might want to look into the leadership who has been running the Community Assistance Panel (CAP), the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) created it!

Independent and validated EPA approved AERMOD / Screen 3 plume analysis conducted clearly demonstrates releases of Dioxin 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD), which is the single most dangerous carcinogenic compound chemical known to man kind.  It was combined with plumes of I-131 Radioactive airborne particulate matter through accidental medical waste incinerations over Tarawa Terrace during 1989-1991 time frame. That is when my family and I were stationed at Camp Lejeune.

This alone is a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, in that the government did not give proper consideration to the surrounding environment prior to building the new Naval Hospital on Brewster Blvd. where my youngest son was born.  He too developed birth defects.

14. Here is even a larger environmental contamination issue that needs addressed:

• The nearby General Electric (GE)- Hitachi Global Uranium Hexafluoride (UF6) Enrichment Plant in Wilmington N.C. “openly documented and admitted potential harm to Camp Lejeune,” and surrounding population for forty (40) years of documented environmental dangers of Uranium Hexafluoride exposures (includes tailings) affecting Camp Lejeune from nearby Castle Hayne, NC, Global Nuclear Fuels-Americas, LLC;

• The radioactive dose factors for the Camp Lejeune population is well within 50 miles and subject to annual Radioactive atmospheric incidents and inhaled radionuclide releases have been documented over Camp Lejeune.

• The release of highly radioactive material to the air and water from the GE- facility represents a potential negative impact on the health and safety of the surrounding population.

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Disabled American Veterans (DAV) Senior National Appeals Officer Validation Letter (2015) to the VA:

The veteran [Peter K. Brannon] disagrees with the February 11, and November 19, 2014 rating decision that continues to deny the (VA) benefits sought.

Issue of Contention – Entitlement to service connection for residuals of thyroid cancer (and respiratory issues) as due to the environmental hazard exposure., to include the question of whether new and material evidence has been received in order to review the case on the merits. Ethical issues concerning counsel was influenced by politicians and defense legal advisors!

Facts – Mr. Brannon has served honorably on active duty (twice) in the United States Marine Corps from June 1977 to April 1983, and again from April 1989 to April 1997, including documented service at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina (CLNC).

Mr. Brannon provided a medical opinion from Dr. Jennifer Tseng of the Anderson Cancer Center, dated in September 2008, [and Dr. Victor Harding in 2009] confirming his diagnosis and his families opining that there was a known link between radiation exposure and thyroid (and other) cancers. Rating action of July 2010 wrongly denied service connection for the thyroid disorder.

The veteran timely disagreed, and on November 16, 2012, a Statement of the Case (SOC) was prepared and provided to him. Since the SOC was prepared more than a year after the original decision, the veteran was afforded 60 days, until January 16, 2013, to substantiate the appeal.

In a substantive appeal signed by the veteran on January 11, 2015, and date stamped as received by the VA on January 28, 2013. The envelop with the postal stamp was not maintained. VA (wrongly) determined the substantive appeal was untimely and accepted it as a claim to reopen, but does not appear to have accurately documented the time frame for submission. Martin Luther King (MLK) Day is a Federal Holiday. In 2013 MLK Day was Monday January 21st.

In September 2013, additional evidence was received from the veteran [Peter K. Brannon] and associated with electronic files. The evidence does clearly document the use of aerial herbicides (Agent Orange) at Camp Lejeune in 1970 and 1971. [U.S. Army’s Prototype (Agent Orange) Ultra Low Volume (ULV) Tactical Herbicide Spraying Apparatuses.

Technically, these were identified as (AA 45Y-1) Agent Orange Defoliant Dispensers, which actually sprayed large quantities of Agent Orange and Agent White (more potent Herbicide) over 500 acres on Camp Lejeune in 1971.

It additionally contains a certification dated in June 2013 from Dr. Andrew Ralowitz, PhD, a specialist in Agronomy & Plant Genetics; Soils, Water and Engineering (SWE).  Dr. Ralowitz goes into detail to explain not only his professional competence and background to proffer the endorsement, but also details Mr. Brannon’s experience and expertise to have developed the evidence.  Dr. Ralowitz then discusses how he vetted the information from the veteran, and concludes with the summary:

I assess that Mr. Brannon’s work absolutely meets the national standard for spatial data accuracy, which is a methodology to estimate the positional accuracy of points on maps and in digital geospatial data, with respect to Geo-referenced ground positions of higher accuracy.  It is therefore, my professional opinion that the above features depict accurate geographic positions of dumps sites, and that these dump sites are very near- water wells located on Camp Lejeune, N.C. Finally, the Google earth images clearly demonstrate that the waste dumps at those particular geographic locations have been significantly altered by man since 1993.

The February 2014 rating decision continued to wrongly deny the claim for lack of new and material evidence, and (wrongly) declared: “We did not find that you participated in a radiation risk activity while in service”.  Initially Mr. Brannon notes that the question of whether his January 2013 substantive appeal was timely received must be fully addressed. Computation of time limit for filing the substantive appeal is addressed in 38 CFR 20.305 Rule 305.

(a) Acceptance of postmark date. When these Rules require that any written document be filed within a specified period of time, a response postmarked prior to expiration of the applicable time limit will be accepted as having been timely filed.

In the event that the postmark is not of record, the postmark date will be presumed to be five days prior to the date of receipt of the document by the Department of Veterans Affairs. In calculating this 5 day period, Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays will be executed.

Mr. Brannon signed his substantive appeal on January 11, 2013, it was accompanied by a (Friday) January 25, 2013, cover letter by his representative, and the VA date stamped it as having been received on (Monday) January 28, 2013.

We assert that the document was given to the VA on the 25th, however, the AOJ did not date stamp it until the following Monday, and failed to keep the envelope with the postal mark, triggering consideration of the postmark date being presumed to have been five days prior to the date of receipt. Id.

The appellant argues that when removing the weekend and holiday (MLK) Day), his substantive appeal was timely received.

Alternatively, however, he does recognize that the initial issue to be addressed by the VA will be whether new and material evidence has been submitted in order to reconsider the previously denied claim based on the merits, and then, if the case is re-opened, whether service connection is warranted.

Subsequent to the original July 2010 denial the veteran has submitted documentation that herbicides were in fact used at CLNC, and has submitted the statement form Dr. Ralowitz Ph.D confirming Mr. Brannon’s research methods and results.

Notably, evidence is presumed credible for the purpose of determining whether new and material evidence has been presented. Fortuck v. Principi, 17 Vet. App.173, 179 (2003); Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet. App.510,512-13 (1992).

Mr. Brannon seeks a grant of service connection connotes many factors but basically it means that the facts, shown by evidence, establish that a particular injury or disease resulting in disability was incurred coincident with service in the Armed Forces, or if preexisting such service, was aggravated therein.

This may be accomplished by affirmatively showing inception or aggravation during service or through the application of statutory presumptions.  Each disabling condition shown by a veterans service records, or for which he seeks a service connection must be considered on the basis of the places, types and circumstances of his service as shown by service records, the official history of each organization in which he served, his medical records and all pertinent medical and lay evidence.

Determinations as to service connection will be based on review of the entire evidence of record, with due consideration to the policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs to administer the law under a broad and liberal interpretation consistent with the facts in each individual case.

Establishing service connection generally requires: (1) medical evidence of a current disability; (2) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service inncurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability. McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App.319 (2007); Kent v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 1 (2006); 38 C.F.R. 3.303(a).

Mr. Brannon (the veteran) has clearly demonstrated that he (and his family) has been diagnosed, treated, and suffers from residuals of thyroid cancer.  He has also clearly demonstrated, through his competent and credible research as endorsed by Dr. Ralowitz PhD that he was in fact exposed to a multitude of carcinogenic pollutants while stationed at CLNC, including the conceded TCE & PCE, as well as (Agent Orange / White) Herbicides and High Level Radioactive waste materials.

Mr. Brannon and Dr. Ralowitz are both Subject Matter Experts (SME) in the field of Geospatial Research and Analysis, and in the absence of an equally qualified expert opposing their findings, the VA must concede the point.

He has, therefore, met the initial two criteria for the establishment of service connection on a direct basis. The third criteria, medical evidence linking the two, is found in the original documentation “submitted by the veteran in the September 2008” statement from Dr. Tseng and (Dr. Victor Harding).

The VA however, sought a medical opinion to address the third criteria, resulting in the June 2010 VAE that declined to resolve the question due to unjustified stated speculation. The Federal Circuit has held that an examiners statement that expresses the inability to come to an opinion ‘provides neither positive nor negative support for service connection. Therefore, it is not pertinent evidence, one way or the other, regarding service connection.” Fagan v. Shinseki, 573 F.3d 1282, 1289 (Fed. Cir.2009).

Similarly, The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (court) held in McLendon v. Nicholson that the board correctly determined that the existing etiological opinions were speculative and did not establish a medical nexus, but the Board “failed to recognize that these opinions also did not establish that there was no medical nexus.” 20 Vet. App. 70, 85 (2006).

 “The VA has erred in its decision that accepted the opinion of the VA examiner as unfavorable.” In light of the favorable link provided by both Dr. Tseng, (and Dr. Harding) “service connection is warranted”.

In further addressing Mr. Brannon’s case, the VA must consider the well established doctrine of reasonable doubt, as addressed in the provisions of 38 CFR 3.102 and 4.3.  The veteran asserts that the preponderance of evidence is in fact in his favor, or at the very least, is in equipoise.

When there is “significant evidence” in support of the claim, if the Board denies the claim, it must provide as adequate explanation as to why the evidence is not in “relative equipoise” so as to warrant application of the benefit-of-the-doubt rule in 38 U.S.C.A. 5107(b). Williams (Willie) v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 270,273-74 (1993).

DAV Conclusion

For the reasons set forth above, Mr. Brannon submits that the appropriate remedy for this appeal is reversal of the prior decision and grant of all benefits [including  retroactive and continuing compensation] sought.

Respectfully submitted, Senior National Appeals Officer Representative for the Appellant Disabled American Veterans National Appeals Office, Suite 2E250, I St. 810 Vermont Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20420.

—————————————————————————————————————————————

The defendant (U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps) and others who are mentioned in this case, now has no leg to stand on in the eyes of a jury and has completely lost all credibility to their four decade old cover-up story.

I conducted this research in accordance with generally accepted analytical standards.  It required that I have sufficient and appropriate amount of reliable evidence to provide a reasonable basis for my findings and conclusions.  This was based on my objectives to understand what happened to me, and more importantly, my family and 3,700 other veterans who have been hurt by this tragedy.  This issue should have risen to the level of impeachment with the Obama Administration, had anyone previously payed attention. It addresses public wrongdoing and the law clearly states that:

“The President will be removed from office for the commission of great offenses he commented against the Constitution. This issue should have resulted in his removal from office and “disqualification from further office” See U.S. Const. art. I, § 3, cl. 7., and 18 U.S. Code 2071. This case justifies the need for an indictment and new proceedings.  It is evident why President Obama wrongly shut this case down, and besides covering up for Hillary on Jan 5, 2017 he stated to the Harvard Law Review concerning “The Presidents Role in Advancing Criminal Justice Reform”.

Obama addressed how Presidents can exert influence over the Criminal Justice System when in fact what he did was completely illegal. He had no authority to intervene. He wrote in his article that the country can afford to spend $80 Billion Dollars on releasing criminals back into society, but I argue he couldn’t do the right thing and spend the same money to assist veterans.

He even praised himself, again, about the progress he apparently made in reforming the criminal justice system – and the challenges that remain for the next administration to clean up just like the two hundred thousand illegal deportation cases he also “quietly” closed.

More damage has been done to this country then previously thought, and the only good thing about the Obama Administration is it ended.  There is more than enough evidence to show that multiple Federal Crimes were committed which must bring about the indictment of those involved. Its the law! (emphasis added)

The House and Senate must be careful who they listen to and prioritize their agenda in order to take steps to repeal and dismantle these unconstitutional acts.  My family and I are front and center victims of this tragedy and no one other than the DAV National Appeals Officer and Congressman Wittman has properly taken action.

There are more than 47,563 law firms serving the U.S. according to the American Bar Foundation, and only one firm pretended to help only to collect our information and delay the process. This case should have been easy for any Toxic Tort Law Firm to take on, because I have satisfied the most difficult aspect of any toxic tort case, which is the issue of causation.  My father in-law passed away on Christmas eve (2016) due to medical complications related to this issue besides recurring medical issues.  In addition, our life expectancy statistically has been reduced due to the mortality rates of aggressive radiation treatments endured.

I will not ignore the inequities that have persisted in our Justice System that has undermined my families Constitutional Rights to seek Justice. The way these acts were supported and written violate not only the Constitution, but statutory law, American tradition and human decency.  What is extremely important, right now, is the safety of the public (Marine and Navy personnel and their families) who continue to be jeopardized to this day.

Obama wasn’t suppose to get involved as he did and the Supreme Court evidently listened to his attorneys who apparently influenced the 11th Circuit Court to adhere to his demands.  As it is with everything else, its all about the money.

They made sure the important decisions to cover things up were made by those who were closest to those who were evidently making a profit.  As in this case, if a law turns out to be unconstitutional, people like myself have the right to notify law enforcement if a crime has been committed and inform Congress so they can rightfully do their job to mend or repeal it. I contacted them and nothing was done.

The Supreme Court assumed that the lower courts (11th Circuit Court) provided them with all the facts, and evidently they didn’t. The calculus is becoming more important in this story as Obama chose not to seek justice in this matter.  Those responsible cannot take advantage of democracy’s best oversight mechanism which is the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform!

For those who have previously testified, the crime of lying under oath is a serious offense.  Refer to the U.S. Department of Justice Report to Congress on the Use of Administrative Subpoena Authorities by Executive Branch Agencies and Entities.  If we are going to advance the cause of Justice, and Equality in this country, then President Trump, the Justice Department, and Congressional Investigative Committees must timely take corrective action.  The Trump Administration must be advised sooner than later, and do their constitutional duty to rectify this issue.

Just think, the vicissitudes of fortune could have been avoided had everyone been truthful and transparent.  Secondly, the Clinton’s were evidently behind this debacle profiting from yet another cold war Superfund site, when they were previously caught and fined doing it before!

Mr. President, you state you embrace big change.  The Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Rep. Trey Gowdy must investigate this issue of environmental crimes at Camp Lejeune to include the cover-up of my families law suit by the Obama Administration.

The Democrats co-sponsored these Acts, and they have some serious explaining to do.  Actually, I cannot wait until Chief of Staff to the President John Kelly,  General Dunford, and Secretary James Mattis hear about this, they will step up and do the right thing where others have not.  With any luck, I hope those who knowingly did wrong have nightmares of Mattis kicking in their door and yelling ” whats taking you so #@$!ing long to take care of my Marines”?

This case adds justification to why Congressmen Steve King, and others, want Clinton and Barack Obama investigated.  The threshold for special council investigation may have been met based on evidence provided.  House and Senate investigative Committees must take action by issuing subpoenas to compel testimony in this case.  Suggest the Senate Ethics Committee and the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee be notified.

This explains why Obama and outgoing VA Secretary Bob McDonald “quietly made public” in their last days in office (Jan 13, 2017) to finalize these unconstitutional rulings through the mechanism of the Veterans Affairs, which continued to spread misinformation in order to put a lid on this major environmental cover up.

Obama and Bob McDonald filed with the Federal Registry, a 152 page document called “The Agency for (in their last days in office) Toxic Substances and Disease Registry the (ATSDR) Assessment on the Evidence for the Drinking Water Contaminates at Camp Lejeune and Specific Cancers and other (non-related) Diseases” dated January 13, 2017.

Former President Obama on Dec 2, 2017 decried an “absence” of U.S. leadership in international efforts to combat climate change.  His comments amounted to a veiled jab at President Trump.  In return, I am sure President Trump can’t wait till a federal judge rules that former Obama and Clinton will be called to testify in the upcoming Camp Lejeune Environmental Contamination scandal.

Conclusion

In anticipation of a more fully amending and updating the historical record:

• • • The Supreme Court and the 11th Circuit Court wrongly denied my Constitutional Rights, and the rights of my family against the government in the courts.

• • • Attorneys failed to properly assist my family and inform authorities, this includes former Congressman Alan Grayson in 2008.  Evidence reveals they too were politically influenced by the Obama Administration not to act.  According to the law, failing to act is a breach of duty and that caused my family and I to suffer financial harm. (emphasis added)

• • • I provided incontrovertible evidence among witnesses that would have changed the outcome of these acts, but it was deliberately “brushed under the rug” and not provided to investigators, or the courts, before or after these laws were enacted.

• • •  Three Congressional inquiries failed to get proper documented responses or actions.

• • • Evidence was  even provided to Virginia Senator Tim Kaine who also failed to respond to this issue. In fact, the following was not previously acknowledged by him or in any Congressional Testimony, Court Hearing, Government Accounting Office (GAO) or CDC/ATSDR or Community Assistance Panel (CAP) report.

• • •  The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) created the Community Assistance Panel (CAP) for the Camp Lejeune Superfund site.  They too found it in their best interest to ignore this issue.

• • • There has been violations of the National Environmental Policy Act, among others.

• • • Those who previously testified to Congress about the Camp Lejeune Water Contamination (EPA) Superfund site evidently gave false testimony under oath!  Thats perjury, and according to the law, the consequences of committing perjury, includes prosecution regardless of official status.

• • • The inability of authorities to properly, and timely investigate, assist, or remedy my VA appeal and our FTCA claims is unconstitutional.

• • • Under the Federal Tort Claims Act rules, Federal District Courts must entertain and satisfy my families $120 Million Dollar Tort Claim attorneys filed for damages, because to ignore and abandon the principles of fairness and due process, violates the rule of law!

“The marvel of all history is the patience with which men and women submit to burdens unnecessarily laid upon  them by their governments”. – George Washington

Our Government’s first duty should be to honor and timely support veterans, particularly those who still continue to defend this country.

I have always been a staunch believer: do the right thing, for the right reasons, regardless of circumstances or consequences. I swore an oath to fight the enemy foreign “or domestic” in order to protect the Constitution, our country, and our people. It is not only my responsibility to keep doing my part in seeking “Equal Justice under the Law” its everyones responsibility.

Additional detailed analysis and chronological slide narrated evidence can be provided.

Be sure of this, the wicked will not go unpunished! Proverbs 11:21