Citation Nr: 18149634 Decision Date: 11/14/18 Archive Date: 11/13/18 DOCKET NO. 16-41 411 DATE: November 14, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, is granted. Entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction, as secondary to diabetes mellitus, type II, is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, he has a current diagnosis of diabetes mellitus, type II, and medical evidence of record establishes a continuity of symptomology from service. 2. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the erectile dysfunction is proximately due to his now-service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. 2. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction, as secondary to diabetes mellitus, type II, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.310. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from September 1982 to September 1997. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Waco, Texas. In May 2018, the Veteran appeared and testified at a Travel Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims file. Service Connection Service connection may be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred or aggravated in active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). In general, service connection requires the following: (1) evidence of a current disability; (2) medical, or in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. See Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). 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. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Additionally, entitlement to service connection may be established on a secondary basis to an already service-connected disability. To substantiate a claim for secondary service connection, evidence is needed to establish that the nonservice-connected current disability is either proximately due to, or the result of, a service-connected disability, or aggravated (increased in severity) beyond its natural progress by a service-connected disability. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.310; see also Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439 (1995). Further, service connection may also be granted for certain enumerated chronic diseases, including diabetes mellitus, that manifest to a compensable degree within one year of the veteran’s separation from service, or where the veteran shows continuity of symptomatology. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309(a); Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2013). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall resolve reasonable doubt in favor of the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). To deny a claim on its merits, the evidence must preponderate against the claim. Alemany v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 518 (1996). Here, the Veteran maintains that he is entitled to service connection for diabetes as it developed within the one-year presumptive period from service. He further claims that his currently diagnosed erectile dysfunction is secondary to his diabetes. Regarding the Veteran’s claim for diabetes, a review of his VA treatment records reflects a current diagnosis of diabetes mellitus, type II; thus, a current disability for this claim has been established. Further, a review of the Veteran’s service treatment records indicates findings of high levels of glucose while in service. After service, the Veteran continued to experience high glucose levels, as well has glucose intolerance. The first instance of a diagnosis of diabetes in the medical records associated with the claims file was in November 2000. As previously discussed, diabetes mellitus is a chronic disability listed under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a). The record does not show that the Veteran was provided a diagnosis of diabetes within one year from separation from service, but the medical evidence of record establishes a continuity of symptomology indicative of diabetes since service. Thus, resolving all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, is granted. Regarding the Veteran’s erectile dysfunction, a review of the Veteran’s VA treatment records reflects a current diagnosis of this disability; thus, a current disability for this claim has been established. Further, a February 2013 notation from the Veteran’s treating VA physician indicates that the Veteran’s erectile dysfunction is associated with his diabetes. Thus, the Board finds, resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, that his currently diagnosed erectile dysfunction is secondary to his now-service-connected diabetes. Therefore, resolving all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, and associated erectile dysfunction, is granted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102 (2017); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Angeline DeChiara, Associate Counsel