Submariners falling ill three years after fatal Chicoutimi fire

[ark]

CP Exclusive: Submariners falling ill three years after fatal Chicoutimi fire
7 hours ago

HALIFAX — Three-and-a-half years after a fatal submarine fire, surviving crew members of HMCS Chicoutimi are falling ill with debilitating conditions - severe enough to force some of them out of the navy.

And researchers, who only recently analyzed the noxious substances in the smoke that crew members inhaled during the electrical fire, have yet to determine the impact on long-term health.

Many of the men and their families have battled bureaucrats over pension entitlements. And at one or time or another, they've had documented compensation claims rejected.

"I know a lot of guys, their health is getting worse," said Denis Lafleur, a former petty officer, who was among the most severely injured.

"Nobody has been willing to come forward and admit what was burned on the boat."

Almost half of the 56 men who battled to save their boat from a raging electrical fire in stormy seas off Ireland in October 2004 have been discharged from the service, will soon leave the military, or are on the medically disabled list.

"It's hard to look in the mirror," said one sailor, who was among more than a half-dozen who agreed to lengthy interviews with The Canadian Press.

"I am a walking shell of what I once was. I was at the peak of my fitness before the fire. I was the healthiest I had been in my whole life and now I am half the person I was."

Sailors still serving spoke on the condition their names not be used. Part of their reluctance stems from not only fear of retribution but from the stigma attached to them by fellow submariners who didn't experience the fire.

At times, they say, their persistent health complaints have labelled them as "sick bay rangers."

The handful of survivors who agreed to come forward brought with them health documentation and letters to back up their claims.

Many of the crew have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress. Some have developed severe breathing difficulties, preventing them from climbing a flight of stairs.

Some sailors have had fainting spells, short-term memory loss. Others have developed chronic conditions, such as asthma.

There are neurological disorders. Crew members spoke of a colleague with epilepsy. Another had brain surgery.

All of those interviewed blame their illnesses on exposure to the noxious smoke and grey soot left over from the fire, which crippled the used British submarine during its maiden voyage to Canada.

Laboratory tests to recreate the thick, black smoke took place just last fall and the chemical analysis only recently landed on the desk of the navy's lead toxicologist, Dr. Stephen Tserkrekos.

"It's been a frustration for me that the process has taken as long as it has, but I'm sort of stuck with the situation the way that it is," said Tserkrekos.

Because of the complexity of the tests, the military was forced to rely on the National Research Council, and had to "get into the queue" with other government departments.

Tserkrekos says it could take until the fall to estimate what impact the cocktail of chemicals had on the sailors.
....

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5gnGwEfaYLdTzlZtjHGxErG0sdWcA

More info is available in the link provided.

 

[mover1]

My Father recently succomed to lung cancer. The DVA atrributed it to his service aboard the Tribal Class destroyers in the 1950's. HE was also aboard one of the ships in the 60's when the av gas blew on the Nippigon.  ( I think it was the Nippigon).
So if anyone wants to use it as precendedce ask the DVA for the Korean War Cancer Survey,  It may help make a case.

 

[GUNS]

Maybe these sailors should do as the Gagetown soldiers are doing (Agent Orange) and file a class action against DND. If possible

DND/VA appears to move very slowly when it comes to providing for service men and women's medical conditions.

 

[mover1]

It only took the DVA 40 years to come up and say something about the pension. And it was fast tracked for him.

 

[Sub_Guy]

I worked in Faslane as part of the recovery crew, we could not go down on the boat without wearing protective coveralls, gloves, and a mask.....  Most of my trips down were very short, although I did spend a morning down there doing some cleaning.

So if I was ordered to wear all that kit for my short little trips down to the boat, I have to wonder what my fellow submariners were exposed to for their trip back to Faslane. 

 

[sgf]

This is another article that was in todays Chronicle Herald

The health problems and subsequent battles for benefits experienced by sailors who fought HMCS Chicoutimi’s fatal fire are "par for the course," says a member of a group that represents retired submariners.

The Canadian Press reported Tuesday that 3 1/2 years after the fire aboard Chicoutimi that killed Lt. Chris Saunders of Bedford, his crewmates are falling ill with debilitating conditions severe enough to force some of them out of the navy.

And researchers, who only recently analyzed the noxious substances in the smoke that crew members inhaled during the electrical fire, have yet to determine the impact on long-term health.

Many of the men and their families have battled bureaucrats over pension entitlements. And at one time or another, they’ve had documented compensation claims rejected.

"It’s par for the course. Brutal, isn’t it? But that’s the way it is," said George Byzewski, a member of the Eastern Branch of the Submariners Association of Canada.

He pointed to the engine room explosion aboard the destroyer HMCS Kootenay in 1969 that killed 10 sailors and injured 52 others.

"This is not a submarine-specific problem as far as I’m concerned," said Mr. Byzewski. "We have people from 1969 who have been ignored. If it stretches back to ’69, then it’s systemic."

Mr. Byzewski retired in 1997 after serving more than 30 years in the navy, most of them in subs.

"Once you are finished with government, they are finished with you, period," he said.

NDP MP Peter Stoffer said he was disturbed but not surprised to hear about the way Chicoutimi’s sailors have been treated.

"It’s a continuous pattern," said Mr. Stoffer, who represents Sackville-Eastern Shore.

"Every single time (military personnel) suffer medically related or psychological problems after the fact, they then have to start another war with the bureaucracy. And it’s unconscionable."

The navy said Tuesday it is doing everything in its power to help the people from Chicoutimi’s former crew.

"We’re trying to make sure that they get the best possible medical care that they can have," said Cmdr. Jeff Agnew of navy public affairs.

In the 15 months after the fire, the military’s medical experts determined nine submariners had medical issues, he said.

The rest of Chicoutimi’s crew were told to see their doctors if they experienced medical problems, Cmdr. Agnew said.

"Nobody is disputing that it was a toxic mix," he said.

But the military’s medical experts determined health problems would have surfaced within the first year after the fire, Cmdr. Agnew said.

"Because a sailor believes he’s entitled to something that he believes occurred during his service does not necessarily mean he is."

Submariners can still seek medical care and complain up the chain of command if they don’t get it, Cmdr. Agnew said.

"If they need assistance, we have many, many places or ways that they can get assistance," he said.

One submariner who was on Chicoutimi during the fire was reluctant to talk about his health problems because he’s still in uniform.

"There are so many guys that I’m afraid aren’t being dealt with appropriately," he said Tuesday. "They’re afraid to come forward with their health problems."

He was pleased the issue has become public.

"I didn’t want to be 60 or 70 years old hearing about friends of mine dying off because they inhaled toxins from this."

Almost half of the 56 men who battled to save their boat from a raging electrical fire in stormy seas off Ireland in October 2004 have reportedly been discharged from the service, will soon leave the military or are on the medically disabled list.

A quarter of the crew has left the navy since the fire — something the navy chalks up to normal attrition.

"Thirteen have (left the navy) since the Chicoutimi incident, but only two of them had less than 20 years of services," Cmdr. Agnew said. "Traditionally, the 20-year mark is when we lose a lot of our people."

Many of the crew have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress. Some have developed severe breathing difficulties, preventing them from climbing a flight of stairs. Some sailors have had fainting spells and short-term memory loss. Others have developed chronic conditions like asthma.

"Because you’re asthmatic, you can’t fight fires. You can’t put on biological chemical defence gear," said the submariner, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

That means you can’t go to sea in a surface ship or a sub, he said.

"You breach the universality of service requirements. Therefore your services are no longer required . . . and it sucks."

A woman who identified herself as a wife of a submariner who was on board Chicoutimi at the time of the fire said her family’s life has changed drastically since the tragic incident.

"My husband still will not talk about a lot of what they encountered but has always said from his first day back that the soot falling on to everything they ate, and breathing it daily, was a cause of concern," she said in a posting on The Chronicle Herald’s website.

"I feel they were not given the utmost care upon their arrival back in Canada."

The submariners should have been forced to seek counselling after the fire, she said.

"I feel the government kicked it all under the rug after the inquiry was over. However, these men and their families are still dealing with an ordeal that will stay with them for the rest of their lives. I know this because I live it. I am very concerned for my husband’s health, both physical and mental, and feel that he, too, has been swept under the rug."

Darren Gibb, a spokesman for the military’s ombudsman, said his office has only received two complaints about the Chicoutimi fire.

"We haven’t been deluged with the number of complaints," Mr. Gibb said. "Certainly we stand ready to assist anyone who may come forward with concerns with the way in which they’ve been treated by the Department of National Defence or the Canadian Forces."

More complaints could spark a broader investigation, he said.

http://www.thechronicleherald.ca/Metro/1043192.html

Unless this was brought to the media, nothing would have been done for these sailors. Interesting to note that serving members did not want their names used.

Lets hope this is not a hint of whats to come for people returning from Afghanistan.

 

[sgf]

Interesting editorial in the Chronicle Herald on how badly the military treats its vets

EDITORIALS
Our veterans deserve better
WHY must those who volunteered to serve in Canada’s Armed Forces so often need to fight – and so often publicly – for better treatment connected to injuries sustained doing their duty?
  The latest case of Canadian military personnel, and vets, running into bureaucratic roadblocks while trying to get help for service-related injuries came to light Tuesday. A Cana­dian Press report revealed many of those serving on the submarine HMCS Chicoutimi in October, 2004, when a fatal fire broke out on the vessel’s maiden voyage, killing Lieut.
  Chris Saunders and injuring eight others, doubtlessly were exposed to varying levels of hazardous substances in the incident.
  Many of the submariners have since been stricken with various debilitating conditions, including severe breathing problems, post-traumatic stress and other medical and neur­ological disorders. Some men reportedly had to quit the navy.
  Sadly, according to the report, many submariners, as well as their families, have since also had to fight for pension benefits and have seen documented claims for compensation de­nied.
  Reacting to the news report, Veterans Affairs Minister Greg Thompson on Tuesday ordered an urgent review of how sub­mariners who survived the Chicoutimi fire have been treat­ed by his department. He also told his senior officials to find out more about hazards faced by the crew as they battled the electrical fire.
  “We are seeking more in­formation because at the end of the day we want the benefit of the doubt to go to the veteran," Mr. Thompson said.
  It’s astonishing that in 2008 the minister would have to instruct senior staff to investi­gate what hazards faced a crew aboard an enclosed sub three­and- a-half years earlier, a crew fighting an onboard fire which almost certainly spewed toxic smoke into the air those men had to breathe. It certainly shouldn’t take a news story.
  Unfortunately, the experience for veterans of the Chicoutimi tragedy seems to be far from an aberration. Too many times, it seems, the benefit of the doubt does not go to the veteran, but to bureaucratic inflexibility.
  Just last year, the federal auditor general was sharply critical of Ottawa for the poor level of mental health services available through the Defence Department. This despite the fact that, according to Veterans Affairs, the number of former soldiers suffering post-traumat­ic stress had tripled – from 1,802 to 6,504 individuals, in a five­year period to March, 2007 – since the deployment in Af­ghanistan began. The military plan is to double mental health staff, from 228 to 447, by 2009.
  Meanwhile, the Canadian Forces’s own ombudsman calls “fundamentally unfair" the ongoing deductions of pain and suffering payments – given for service-related injuries -- from the pensions of more than 4,000 wounded veterans. A lawsuit is before the court on that matter.
  Two years ago, the same ombudsman found that the military had systematically ignored health complaints by 350 soldiers exposed to depleted uranium, and other health hazards in the 1991 Persian Gulf War in Kuwait.
  Disturbing allegations of tampering with medical files of military personnel have also surfaced. In 2000, a board of inquiry found information was deliberately removed from the files of Canadian peacekeepers exposed to toxic chemicals in Croatia in 1993.
  The list goes on. Those who served their country, including those submariners aboard Chicoutimi, deserve better.
 

Seems nothing much has changed since I was in...

http://www.thechronicleherald.ca/Editorial/1043444.html

 

[the 48th regulator]

Interesting editorial in the Chronicle Herald on how badly the military treats its vets

Seems nothing much has changed since I was in...

http://www.thechronicleherald.ca/Editorial/1043444.html

Please note it is not only the "Military" that this treatment towards Veterans is coming from, but the Department of Veteran affairs.  A dept. that has been broken for many a year...

dileas

tess

 

[sgf]

i realize that it is both departments

 

[the 48th regulator]

i realize that it is both departments

Neat,

Glad I was able to help.  Didn't want people to be mislead.

dileas

tess

 

[sgf]

mislead, no one is trying to do that.. its very well laid out in the articles who is at fault, both dnd and dva...

 

[the 48th regulator]

mislead, no one is trying to do that.. its very well laid out in the articles who is at fault, both dnd and dva...

Agreed the article did do that,

However, when you said;

Interesting editorial in the Chronicle Herald on how badly the military treats its vets

It implies that they (the military) are solely responsible for the decisions that are actually made by DVA, with regards to the pension claims, which is not correct.

Wouldn't you agree that your statement can then be misleading, not the article?

dileas

tess

 

[sgf]

I have known many military personnel who have been very badly treated by  the military while they were still in the service and after their retirement. Lots of fights for medical pensions and entitlements. In the article, it was pointed out that many of these sailors still in the military are not getting the treatment they need so yes I do feel that the military has not stepped up to the plate in many incidents. DVA hasnt either and there are still many reports in the papers of vetern's wives from WW2 who still are not getting benefits.

 

[the 48th regulator]

I have known many military personnel who have been very badly treated by  the military while they were still in the service and after their retirement.

I appreciate the fact that you are speaking from experience of knowing people who have been badly treated, I will speak from personal experience of what I had to deal with when I was wounded.  Are you making a statement that the article is correct when it said;

Disturbing allegations of tampering with medical files of military personnel have also surfaced. In 2000, a board of inquiry found information was deliberately removed from the files of Canadian peacekeepers exposed to toxic chemicals in Croatia in 1993.

That the military have removed, or not placed details in the soldiers medical files, which is guiding the decision of the DVA to rule against them?  If that is what you meant by your statement, then you should have said that in my opinion. 

Lots of fights for medical pensions and entitlements. In the article, it was pointed out that many of these sailors still in the military are not getting the treatment they need so yes I do feel that the military has not stepped up to the plate in many incidents.

What does the Military have to do to Step up to the plate?  Spell out what you feel is not happening.
Unfortunately the onus is on the individual to seek, and fight for a pensioned condition.  This is where I will agree with you, that maybe there is lack of a system in place to guide soldiers, within the military system, to apply for treatment and a pension, however from reading within the sites threads it is getting better.  For example OSISS in working alongside the military to help members who suffer from mental health injuries.

DVA hasn't either and there are still many reports in the papers of veteran's wives from WW2 who still are not getting benefits.

Although you try to throw a boomerang with this statement, again this has absolutely nothing to do with the military.

Bottom line is the troops are not getting the help they require, and although some of it can be attributed to the military, the article does little in way of evidence, in showing the the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the military.  The DVA rules on the decision of Pensions, and it is the DVA that has denied the soldiers any benefits.  Unless these soldiers find ways to fight it, they will Have to live with the fact that they have been denied.

Might I suggest you read some of these threads, before you shoot with eyes shut and blame the military for everything....

http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php/board,76.0.html

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/41768.0.html

There is plenty of information that can show you the actual process, and ways you can use the system to help one attain a favourable decision, and medical treatment deserved.

dileas

tess

 

[sgf]

I appreciate the fact that you are speaking from experience of knowing people who have been badly treated, I will speak from personal experience of what I had to deal with when I was wounded.  Are you making a statement that the article is correct when it said;


That the military have removed, or not placed details in the soldiers medical files, which is guiding the decision of the DVA to rule against them?  If that is what you meant by your statement, then you should have said that in my opinion. 


What does the Military have to do to Step up to the plate?  Spell out what you feel is not happening.
Unfortunately the onus is on the individual to seek, and fight for a pensioned condition.  This is where I will agree with you, that maybe there is lack of a system in place to guide soldiers, within the military system, to apply for treatment and a pension, however from reading within the sites threads it is getting better.  For example OSISS in working alongside the military to help members who suffer from mental health injuries.

Although you try to throw a boomerang with this statement, again this has absolutely nothing to do with the military.

Bottom line is the troops are not getting the help they require, and although some of it can be attributed to the military, the article does little in way of evidence, in showing the the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the military.  The DVA rules on the decision of Pensions, and it is the DVA that has denied the soldiers any benefits.  Unless these soldiers find ways to fight it, they will Have to live with the fact that they have been denied.

Might I suggest you read some of these threads, before you shoot with eyes shut and blame the military for everything....

http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php/board,76.0.html

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/41768.0.html

There is plenty of information that can show you the actual process, and ways you can use the system to help one attain a favourable decision, and medical treatment deserved.

dileas

tess

I do think the military have removed medical reports from patients files over the year and one way the forces can step up to the plate is to stop this practise. DND can also  ensure  these personnel in this article receive the treatment they require, while still in the military. If that was happening, articles like this would not be required. Perhaps on medical release there can be some information or other help given to the retiree that will help him fight (sad that a person has to fight for this) for his entitlements with DVA, because it sure doesnt seem to be there now. Those are a few things that the military can step up to the plate about.  There was a good article in the Globe last week on wounded soliders remaining in the military, perhaps this can be extended to other personnel who have been injured. I dont know why there cant be more or better liaison between DND and DVA to ensure that injured or sick personnel get everything that they are entitled too. Put that in place, thats yet another way the miltiary can step up and take care of its personnel.

Regarding what I said about the benefits for widows, no where did I say this had anything to do with the military but only DVA.

Sure there is a wack of information out there on how to apply to get what you deserve. Sadly in many cases even after following the information and applying there are many people that do not get a favourable decision or treatment they deserve.