REPATRIATION MEDICAL AUTHORITY
STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES NO. 43 of 2006
VETERANS’ ENTITLEMENTS ACT 1986
MILITARY REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION ACT 2004
EXPLANATORY NOTES FOR TABLING
- The Repatriation Medical Authority (‘the Authority’), under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (‘the VEA’) revokes Instrument No. 147 of 1995 of 13 April 1995 determined under subsection 196B(2) of the VEA concerning Caisson disease and death from Caisson disease.
2. The Authority is of the view that there is sound medical-scientific evidence that indicates that decompression sickness and death from decompression sickness can be related to particular kinds of service. The Authority has therefore determined pursuant to subsection 196B(2) of the VEA a Statement of Principles, Instrument No. 43 of 2006 concerning decompression sickness. This Instrument will in effect replace the revoked Statements of Principles for Caisson disease.
3. The provisions of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (‘the MRCA’) relating to claims for compensation commenced on 1 July 2004. Claims under section 319 of the MRCA for acceptance of liability for a service injury sustained, a service disease contracted or service death on or after 1 July 2004 are determined by the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission by reference to Statements of Principles issued by the Authority pursuant to the VEA.
4. The Statement of Principles sets out the factors that must as a minimum exist, and which of those factors must be related to the following kinds of service rendered by a person:
operational service under the VEA;
peacekeeping service under the VEA;
hazardous service under the VEA;
warlike service under the MRCA;
non-warlike service under the MRCA,
before it can be said that a reasonable hypothesis has been raised connecting decompression sickness or death from decompression sickness, with the circumstances of that service.
5. This new instrument results from an investigation notified by the Authority in the Government Notices Gazette of 31 March 2004 concerning Caisson disease in accordance with section 196G of the Act. The investigation involved an examination of the sound medical-scientific evidence now available to the Authority, including the sound medical-scientific evidence it has previously considered.
6. The contents of the new Instrument are in similar terms as the revoked Instruments. Comparing the new and the revoked Instruments, the differences include:
- adopting the latest revised Instrument format, which commenced in 2005;
- deleting the ICD code from the Instrument header;
- new definition for ‘decompression sickness’ in clause 3 which replaces definition for Caisson disease;
- rewording factor 6(a) relating to ‘an episode of decompression’;
- including new definitions for ‘an episode of decompression’; ‘death from decompression sickness’; ‘relevant service’; and ‘terminal event’ in clause 9; and
- specifying a date of effect for the Instrument in clause 11.
7. Further changes to the format of the Instrument reflect the commencement of the MRCA and clarify that pursuant to subsection 196B(3A) of the VEA, the Statement of Principles has been determined for the purposes of both the VEA and the MRCA.
8. Prior to determining this instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to Caisson disease in the Government Notices Gazettes of 31 March 2004, and circulated a copy of the notice of intention to investigate to a wide range of organisations representing veterans, service personnel and their dependants. The Authority invited submissions from the Repatriation Commission, organisations and persons referred to in section 196E of the VEA, and any person having expertise in the field. One submission was received for consideration by the Authority.
9. Following the commencement of the MRCA, the Authority published a “Further Notice of Investigations” in the Government Notices Gazette of 14 July 2004, extending the closing date for submissions in relation to the above mentioned investigation until 10 September 2004. The Authority again invited submissions from the Repatriation Commission, organisations and persons referred to in section 196E of the VEA (who include persons eligible to make a claim under the MRCA), as well as the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission and any person having expertise in the field.
10. The determining of this new instrument finalises the investigation in relation to Caisson disease as advertised in the Government Notices Gazettes of 31 March 2004.
11. A list of references relating to the above condition is available, on written request, from the Repatriation Medical Authority Secretariat.
Overview
The Repatriation Medical Authority, under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, has revoked Instrument No. 147 of 1995 concerning Caisson disease and has introduced a new Statement of Principles No. 43 of 2006 regarding decompression sickness. This change addresses the issue of providing adequate medical-scientific evidence connecting decompression sickness and death from decompression sickness to particular types of military service. The Authority determined this new Statement of Principles to replace the previous one for Caisson disease, following an investigation into the matter. This new instrument, which also considers the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, sets out the minimum factors necessary to establish a reasonable hypothesis linking decompression sickness or death from decompression sickness to specific service types, including operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, warlike, and non-warlike service. The Authority undertook this investigation and gathered submissions from relevant organisations and experts, ensuring a comprehensive review of the available evidence before finalising the new instrument.
Scope and Application
The Repatriation Medical Authority Statement of Principles No. 43 of 2006, established under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, pertains to the medical condition known as decompression sickness, previously referred to as Caisson disease. This legislation applies to individuals who have served in various capacities, including operational, peacekeeping, and hazardous services as defined under the VEA, as well as warlike and non-warlike services under the MRCA. The Statement of Principles outlines the specific circumstances and factors that must be present to establish a connection between decompression sickness or death from such sickness and the service rendered. The scope of this legislation is national, covering claims for compensation for injuries or diseases sustained or contracted on or after 1 July 2004, which are determined by the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission. The Authority’s determination of this new instrument concludes the investigation into Caisson disease that was previously advertised in the Government Notices Gazettes of 31 March 2004. The Authority ensured a transparent process by inviting submissions from relevant organisations, the Repatriation Commission, the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, and any individuals with expertise in the field.
Key Provisions
The Repatriation Medical Authority, as outlined in section 196B(8) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA), has revoked Instrument No. 147 of 1995, which related to Caisson disease, and has issued a new Statement of Principles, Instrument No. 43 of 2006, concerning decompression sickness. This new instrument effectively replaces the previous one and aims to address the evidence linking decompression sickness and death from decompression sickness to certain types of military service. The Authority's decision is based on the sound medical-scientific evidence available, which suggests that decompression sickness can be related to specific kinds of service, including operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, warlike, and non-warlike service under the VEA and MRCA respectively.
Under the new Instrument No. 43 of 2006, certain factors must exist and be related to the aforementioned types of service for a reasonable hypothesis to be raised that decompression sickness or death from decompression sickness is connected to the service circumstances. These factors are detailed in the Statement of Principles and are essential for veterans or service personnel seeking compensation or benefits related to their service. The Instrument clarifies the types of service that can be considered relevant for the purposes of establishing a link to decompression sickness, ensuring that claims are evaluated based on the most current and scientifically sound evidence.
The obligations imposed by this Act include the requirement for the Authority to undertake an investigation and gather submissions from relevant parties, including the Repatriation Commission, organisations representing veterans and service personnel, and experts in the field. The Authority must consider these submissions and determine whether the new Statement of Principles accurately reflects the current medical-scientific understanding of decompression sickness. Additionally, claims for compensation under section 319 of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA) for injuries or diseases sustained on or after 1 July 2004 must be assessed in accordance with the new Statement of Principles. This ensures that the assessment of claims is consistent with the latest evidence and legal requirements.
The Act also outlines the consequences for non-compliance or breach of its provisions. While specific offences and penalties are not detailed in the explanatory notes, breaches of the provisions of the VEA and MRCA related to compensation claims can result in various civil or criminal consequences. These may include fines, imprisonment, or other penalties as prescribed by the respective Acts. The exact penalties would depend on the nature and severity of the breach, and would be determined in accordance with the relevant legislative provisions. The focus of the Act is to ensure that the compensation process is fair, transparent, and based on the most current medical-scientific evidence.