Citation Nr: 21074916 Decision Date: 12/16/21 Archive Date: 12/16/21 DOCKET NO. 17-27 706 DATE: December 16, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, to include as secondary to herbicide agent exposure, is granted. FINDING OF FACT 1. Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Veteran was at least as likely as not exposed to an herbicide agent during active service. 2. The Veteran has been diagnosed as having diabetes mellitus, type II. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1116B, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Army from October 1967 to October 1987. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2015 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) denying service connection for diabetes, claimed as secondary to herbicide agent exposure during service. The Veteran appeared before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a Board hearing in June 2021. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, to include as secondary to herbicide agent exposure. Service connection will be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service connection requires evidence showing: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection may be established on a presumptive basis for diseases enumerated in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e) for veterans who were exposed to certain herbicide agents during active military, naval, or air service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6). The term "herbicide agent" is defined as a chemical in an herbicide used in support of the United States and allied military operations in the Republic of Vietnam during the period beginning on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975, specifically: 2,4-D; 2,4,5-T and its contaminant TCDD; cacodylic acid; and picloram. 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(i). If a veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during active military, naval, or air service, certain conditions, including type II diabetes mellitus, shall be presumed to be service connected even though there is no record of such disease during service. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e). Previously, a veteran would only be presumed to have been exposed to an herbicide agent if the record demonstrated service between April 1, 1968, and August 31, 1971, in a unit that the Department of Defense determined operated in or near the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) in an area in which herbicides are known to have been applied during that period. 38 C.F.R. § 3.307 (a)(6)(iv) (2018). Recent legislation has expanded the presumption of herbicide agent exposure as of January 1, 2020, for certain veterans who served in Korea. 38 U.S.C. § 1116B. Specifically, the legislation provides that the presumption of exposure will apply to a veteran "who, during active military, naval, or air service, served in or near the Korean [DMZ], during the period beginning on September 1, 1967, and ending on August 31, 1971." Notably, the legislation contains no reference to units designated by Department of Defense; it simply refers to veterans who "served in or near" the DMZ. When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any material issue, reasonable doubt will be resolved in favor of the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Here, the record establishes the Veteran was at least as likely as not exposed to an herbicide agent during active service. The Veteran contends that he was exposed to herbicide agents while serving at Camp Beavers for two to three months between 1968 and 1969. Camp Beavers was located in Korea, approximately 10 kilometers away from the region officially recognized as the Korean DMZ. The Veteran's military personnel records confirm that he served in Korea from March 1968 to April 1969. The Veteran also obtained a buddy statement from his former platoon leader corroborating this claim, including a copy of the platoon leader's special orders stationing him at Camp Beavers in 1968. Buddy statements from both the platoon leader and one of the Veteran's fellow unit servicemembers stated that the Veteran's duties included traveling in and out of the Korean DMZ to move and dismantle equipment in the region. Although the Joint Services Record Research Center informed the Agency of Original Jurisdiction it was unable to corroborate the Veteran's specific assertions regarding herbicide agent exposure because of a determination that the Veteran provided insufficient information to allow for meaningful research of records, the Board finds there is no reason to doubt the credibility of the documentary evidence the Veteran has submitted to support his claim. The record further establishes the Veteran has been diagnosed as having diabetes mellitus, type II, a disease presumed to result from herbicide agent exposure. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e). Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board concludes herbicide agent exposure should be conceded in his case. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. As a result, the criteria for service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, have been met. See Wise v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 517, 532 (2014) ("By requiring only an 'approximate balance of positive and negative evidence' the Nation, 'in recognition of our debt to our veterans,' has 'taken upon itself the risk of error' in awarding . . . benefits."). M. HYLAND Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Narnor, Harriyah The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.