V.A. LEGALESE

.A. LEGALESE

The

.A.'s

denial for service connection for AML

, for most of the veterans, is

determined based on ruling of

38CFR3.309

and

38CFR3.307

Generally the veteran

is given a one sentence denial based on these rulings, the jist of which, is that service

connection is denied as the disease did not manifest within one year of the veterans

last day of service and that AML can not be considered service connected based on

this. Medical facts of chemical exposure do not appear to be given consideration.

e believe

that

either of the above rulings (written in 1947) really applies to today's

Gulf War and the threat of chemical exposure. In absence of more fitting rulings we

believe of the existing rulings more

applicable

nes

would be:

38CFR3.303

; Principles relating to service connection “…the facts, shown by

evidence, establish that a particular injury or disease resulting in disability was

incurred coincident with service in the Armed Forces.” “Each disabling condition

shown by a veteran’s 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 record and all pertinent medical and lay evidence.” “Service connection

may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence,

including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in

service. Presumptive periods are not intended to limit service connection to diseases

so diagnosed when the evidence warrants direct service connection. The presumptive

provisions of the statute and Department of Veteran Affairs regulations implementing

them are intended as liberalizations applicable when the evidence would not warrant

service connection without their aid.”

38CFR3.304

; Direct service connection; wartime and peacetime determination

“. . . should be based on thorough analysis of the evidentiary showing and careful

correlation of all material facts, with due regard to accepted medical principles

pertaining to the history, manifestation, clinical course, and character of the

particular injury or disease or residuals thereof.” “Satisfactory lay or other evidence

that an injury or disease was incurred or aggravated in combat will be accepted as

sufficient proof of service connection if the evidence is consistent with the

circumstances, conditions or hardships of such service even though there is no

official record of such incurrence or aggravation.”

38CFR3.311

; Claims based on exposure to ionizing radiation “determination of dose

and exposure. . . in all claims in which it is established that a radiogenic disease first

became manifest after service . . . and it is contended that the disease is a result of

exposure to ionizing radiation in service, an assessment will be made as to the size

and nature of the radiation dose or doses. . . exposure at the highest level of the dose

range will be presumed.” “. . . the veteran subsequently developed a radiogenic

disease; and such disease first became manifest within the period specified. . .” “. . .

for the purpose of this section the term ‘radiogenic disease’ means a disease that may

be induced by ionizing radiation and shall include the following: (i) all forms of

leukemia” “leukemia may become manifest at any time after exposure.” “…consider

the claim if

. . it is at least as likely as not the veteran’s disease resulted from exposure to

radiation in service.” “… ‘sound medical evidence’ means observations, findings, or

conclusions which are consistent with current medical knowledge and are so

reasonable and logical as to serve as the basis of management of a medical

condition.” “the disease, including the specific cell type and stage, if known, and

when the disease first became manifest; the circumstances, including date, of the

veteran’s exposure.”