Citation Nr: 21076182 Decision Date: 12/22/21 Archive Date: 12/22/21 DOCKET NO. 16-17 530 DATE: December 22, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus (DM), type II is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active-duty service in the Navy from September 1961 to January 1965, and from January 1965 to July 1968. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a June 2012 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran and his wife testified at a hearing in October 2021 before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of that hearing is of record. 1. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II The Veteran claims that his claimed for DM type II condition is related to his service during the Vietnam War era. Alternatively, the Veteran believes his condition is related to the food he ate during service. See October 2021 Board hearing transcript. At the outset, the Board notes that the Veteran did not have service "in-country' in Vietnam, nor did the Veteran serve within 12 nautical miles of Vietnam. See military personnel records. Moreover, the Veteran does not allege that he served in Vietnam. See August 2012 Notice of Disagreement ("I did not go to Vietnam"). As such, the Board finds that the Veteran's claim fails as a matter of law with respect to presumptive service connection based on herbicide exposure. However, the Veteran testified that his diabetes may be due to the food he ate during service, and further indicated that he remembered passing out in service, which he feels is an early sign of diabetes. See October 2021 Board hearing transcript. The Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) include three references to a potential diabetes diagnosis. Specifically, they indicate that during service he often complained of stomach cramps, and the attending physician questioned whether said cramps may be due to diabetes, as his parents have a history of the same. See February 26, 1968, February 28, 1968, and March 1, 1968 STRs. As such, given that the Veteran's STRs indicate that his condition may have incurred/manifested during service, or within the one-year presumptive period for chronic conditions, the Board finds that his claim meets the low threshold under McLendon, entitling him to a VA examination to assess the nature and etiology of his diagnosed diabetes condition on remand. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.307; 38 C.F.R. § 3.309 (a); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). 2. Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. Upon review of the record, the Board notes that the Veteran submitted additional details, of which had been previously requested by the RO but not received, regarding his alleged in-service stressors. See March 2016 Statement in Support of Claim; October 2021 Board hearing transcript. As such, the Board finds that a remand is warranted here to make an additional attempt the verify the same. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder... 1. Request from any appropriate official sources information in an attempt to verify the Veteran's claimed stressors. See VBMS, document titled "Statement in Support of Claim," receipt dated April 5, 2016; see also VBMS, document titled "Medical Treatment Record Government Facility," receipt dated August 15, 2013; and, VBMS, document titled "Hearings Transcript", receipt dated October 5, 2021, in which he describes the USS Luce taking fire while in the area of the Dominican Republic. If any relevant information or requested records are not available, or the search for such records or information yields negative results, that fact must clearly be documented in the claims file. 2. If, and only if, the Veteran's claimed for stressor(s) are verified upon remand, schedule a VA examination to assess the nature and etiology of his claimed for PTSD condition. Upon review of the pertinent evidence of record, medical and lay, to include this remand, the VA examiner is requested to opine as to the following: Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran's claimed for PTSD condition incurred during service, or is directly related to service as due to a verified stressor? Diabetes Mellitus Type II... 3. Obtain an opinion for the Veteran's claimed for diabetes mellitus type II condition. Upon review of the record, to include this remand, as well as indicated below, the VA examiner is requested to opine as to the following: Direct Service Connection... Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran's claimed for diabetes mellitus type II condition incurred during service, or otherwise directly related to service? Presumptive Service Connection... Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran's claimed for diabetes mellitus type II condition (1) began during active service, (2) manifested within one year following his discharge from service, or (3) was noted during service with continuity of the same symptomatology since service? For both requested medical opinions for the Veteran's claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus type II, the VA examiner should specifically address his service treatments records which suggest that he may have experienced early manifestations of diabetes mellitus type II during service based on notations of having experienced abdominal cramps and related symptomatology. See VBMS, document titled "STR-Medical," receipt dated April 3, 2014 (STRs dated, February 26, 1968, February 28, 1968, and March 1, 1968 therein, on pages 18-21, and 62) which note potential diabetes mellitus. Additionally, the VA examiner is requested to address the lay testimony of record indicating that during service the Veteran remembers having passed out, which he attributes to as being early signs/indications of his subsequently diagnosed diabetes mellitus type II condition. See VBMS, document titled "Hearing Transcript," receipt dated October 5, 2021. The examiner is asked to explain the reasons behind any opinions expressed and conclusions reached. The examiner is reminded that the term "as likely as not" does not mean "within the realm of medical possibility," but rather that the evidence of record is so evenly divided that, in the examiner's expert opinion, it is as medically sound to find in favor of the proposition as it is to find against it. Bethany L. Buck Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S.R. Fey, Associate Counsel 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.