Citation Nr: 18149420 Decision Date: 11/09/18 Archive Date: 11/09/18 DOCKET NO. 16-37 124 DATE: November 9, 2018 ORDER Service connection for peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities, to include as a result of exposure to herbicide agents, is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s peripheral neuropathy did not manifest within a year of his presumed exposure to herbicide agents and the evidence of record does not otherwise suggest that it either began during or was otherwise caused by his military service, to include any exposures therein. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities, to include as a result of exposure to herbicide agents, have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active military service from June 1968 to January 1970, to include service in the Republic of Vietnam. Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection requires competent evidence showing: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Additionally, service connection can also be established through application of a statutory presumption for chronic diseases, like organic diseases of the nervous system, including peripheral neuropathy, when manifested to a compensable degree within a year of separation from service. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309. If a chronic disease is not manifested to a compensable degree within a year of separation of service, then, generally, a showing of “continuity of symptoms” after service is required for service connection. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (b). Further, a veteran who served in Vietnam during the Vietnam Era is presumed to have been exposed to Agent Orange. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. § 3.307. Certain enumerated chronic diseases associated with exposure to herbicide agents (Agent Orange) may be service connected on a presumptive basis as due to exposure to herbicides. 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e). Of note, peripheral neuropathy is a disease that VA regulations include on the presumptive list. However, additional regulations specify that for peripheral neuropathy to be presumptively service-connected based on herbicide exposure, the peripheral neuropathy must be “early-onset”, meaning that it first manifests within a year of the last date on which the Veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during active service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(ii). Private treatment records confirm that the Veteran has been diagnosed with peripheral neuropathy. Nevertheless, the Veteran’s service treatment records are silent for reports of or treatment for peripheral neuropathy. The Veteran’s lower extremities, as well as his neurologic system, were evaluated as normal during his separation physical in January 1970. The earliest medical records contained in the claims file documenting peripheral neuropathy are dated after the turn of the millennium, decades after he separated from service. The Veteran, having served in the Republic of Vietnam during the Vietnam Era, is presumed to have been exposed to herbicide agents. In fact, as argued by the Veteran in his notice of disagreement and as shown by the record, he has even previously been granted service connection for prostate cancer on a presumptive basis due to his presumed herbicide agent exposure. Peripheral neuropathy, however, has distinct additional manifestation requirements not required for a similar presumptive service connection for prostate cancer. Namely, peripheral neuropathy must be shown to manifest within one year of herbicide agent exposure. This condition was not shown to manifest within the required time frame to meet the herbicide agent exposure presumption for service connection. The Board will consider whether service connection is warranted on a direct basis. Unfortunately, the record does not include a medical opinion even suggesting that a medical nexus exists between the Veteran’s herbicide exposure, or any other in-service incurrence, and his peripheral neuropathy. Thus, a direct service connection is not warranted for this condition. Additionally, the evidence of record is not sufficient to demonstrate that it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s peripheral neuropathy manifested to a compensable degree within one year of separation of service; or within one year of his last herbicide exposure. Thus, a presumptive service connection is also not warranted for the Veteran’s peripheral neuropathy, as either a chronic condition or as a condition resulting from exposure to herbicide agents. As a lay person, the Veteran is competent to report what comes to him through his senses, but he lacks the medical training and expertise to provide a complex medical opinion as to the etiology of a neurologic disability such as peripheral neuropathy. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994), Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F. 3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). As such, his opinion and lay statements linking his neuropathy to his Agent Orange exposure are insufficient to provide the requisite nexus. Therefore, the evidence in this case is not so evenly balanced so as to allow application of the benefit-of-the-doubt rule as required by law and VA regulations. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. As such, entitlement to service connection for peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities is denied. Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD C. Davidoski, Associate Counsel