Citation Nr: 18142517 Decision Date: 10/16/18 Archive Date: 10/16/18 DOCKET NO. 16-15 488 DATE: October 16, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer is granted. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus (DM), type II, is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Service caused the Veteran's prostate cancer. 2. Service did not cause the Veteran's DM. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for prostate cancer have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. 2. The criteria for service connection for DM have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303, 3.307. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had active duty service from March 1962 to June 1966. The Appellant is the Veteran's widow. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2014 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Service Connection Generally, to prove service connection, there must be competent, credible evidence of (1) a current disability, (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of an injury or disease, and (3) a nexus, or link, between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. See, e.g., Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Pond v. West, 12 Vet. App. 341 (1999). Issue 1: Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer The Veteran died in September 2016 of prostate cancer. This cancer was active as he was pursuing the claim for which VA has substituted the Appellant. This satisfies the first prong of service connection. VA found the Veteran was exposed to trichloroethane (TCE) during service in the March 2016 Statement of the Case. This satisfies the second prong of service connection. The appeal turns on the third prong of service connection – medical nexus. VA examined the Veteran in December 2015. The examiner opined that the TCE exposure did not cause the Veteran's cancer. The Veteran subsequently submitted evidence contradicting the examiner's opinion, so VA ordered s supplemental opinion in April 2016. The supplemental opinion was also negative, most notably because "although TCE is classified as carcinogenic to humans, this is based on the evidence of causation of kidney cancer, rather than prostate cancer." To rebut this finding, the Veteran submitted a nexus statement from Dr. M.C., M.D., Ph.D., his treating physician and an expert in urology. Dr. M.C., citing the Veteran's history and medical journal articles, causally connected the prostate cancer to the TCE exposure. The undersigned finds the expert opinions are of similar probative value, so the evidence regarding nexus is in equipoise. Accordingly, the Veteran prevails, and the third prong of service connection is satisfied. The Appellant has satisfied all three prongs of a service connection claim, so the Board grants the appeal. Issue 2: Entitlement to service connection for DM The Veteran had DM when he died in September 2016. This DM was active as he was pursuing the claim for which VA has substituted the Appellant. This satisfies the first prong of service connection. VA found the Veteran was exposed to trichloroethane (TCE) during service in the March 2016 Statement of the Case. This satisfies the second prong of service connection. (Continued on the next page)   The appeal turns on the third prong of service connection – medical nexus. VA examined the Veteran in December 2015. The examiner opined that the TCE exposure did not cause the Veteran’s DM because "review of data on TCE show no definitive studies that exist to substantiate a linkage or relationship of diabetes and TCE exposure at Camp Pendleton." Neither the Veteran nor the Appellant attempted to refute this finding, so this is the only statement regarding nexus in the claims file. Accordingly, the third prong of service connection is not met, and the Board will deny the appeal. KELLI A. KORDICH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Sopko, Counsel