Citation Nr: 21007114 Decision Date: 02/08/21 Archive Date: 02/08/21 DOCKET NO. 18-27 138 DATE: February 8, 2021 ORDER Service connection for diabetes mellitus is granted. Service connection for chronic bronchitis is granted. REMANDED Service connection for erectile dysfunction is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the evidence of record establishes the Veteran has a current diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and participated in combat support activities in the Republic of Vietnam. (See February 1967 military personnel record; April 2015 statement from Veteran; April 2015 military personnel record; November 2016 Notice of Disagreement (NOD)). Accordingly, herbicide exposure is presumed and service connection for diabetes mellitus is warranted on a presumptive basis. 2. Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the evidence of record establishes the Veteran has a current diagnosis of chronic bronchitis, was treated for this condition while in service, and the observable symptoms associated with this disability have persisted since his active duty service, thus establishing a causal link (nexus) between the disease he experienced in service and his current diagnosis. (See VA treatment records; multiple service treatment records between March 1961 and December 1968) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Service connection for diabetes mellitus is warranted, based on presumed in-service exposure to herbicide agents and presumptive service connection. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 1116, 1137, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309. 2. Service connection for chronic bronchitis is warranted. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 1116, 1137, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 3.307. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from February 1961 to December 1968, with service in Thailand and Vietnam. These matters are before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from June 2014 and November 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). The Board finds that new and material evidence was added to the Veteran’s claims file within one year of the June 2014 rating decision that denied service connection for diabetes mellitus and erectile dysfunction. This evidence, in the form of a statement submitted by the Veteran, provided important information about the Veteran’s service in Thailand and Vietnam. Therefore, the June 2014 rating decision did not become final and new and material evidence is not required to address the Veteran’s original claim. Service Connection 1. Service connection for diabetes mellitus is granted. For the reasons outlined above, the service connection for diabetes mellitus is warranted. 2. Service connection for chronic bronchitis is granted. For the reasons outlined above, the service connection for chronic bronchitis is warranted. REASONS FOR REMAND Service connection for erectile dysfunction is remanded. The Veteran asserts his erectile dysfunction is caused or aggravated by his diabetes mellitus. He has not been afforded a VA examination for his erectile dysfunction. The Board has granted service connection for diabetes mellitus and a VA examination is required in order to determine if the Veteran’s claimed condition is caused or aggravated by his now service-connected diabetes mellitus. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Please note that, by law, ALL remanded claims must be processed expeditiously. 2. The AOJ should arrange for a VA examination (or telehealth interview, review of the record, etc., if an in-person examination is not feasible) of the Veteran to determine the nature and likely cause of any erectile dysfunction disability. The examiner should review the claim file (including this remand) and note such review was conducted. Based on review of the record and examination of the Veteran, the examiner should provide an opinion with detailed rationale that responds to the following: (a.) Please identify, by diagnosis, all erectile dysfunction disabilities present during the appeal period (from April 2015). (b.) For each erectile dysfunction disability diagnosed, is it at least as likely as not (50% or greater probability) that the disability was either caused or aggravated by the Veteran’s service-connected diabetes mellitus? Please explain why. The opinion must address whether the disability increased in severity beyond its natural progression (i.e., was aggravated). If aggravation is found, please identify to the extent possible the baseline level of disability prior to the aggravation. (c.) For each erectile dysfunction disability diagnosed, is it at least as likely as not (50% or greater probability) that the disability was either incurred in or otherwise related to the Veteran’s active duty service, specifically by exposure to herbicide agents in Vietnam? Please explain why. The examiner may not solely rely on an absence of a VA presumption for a diagnosed disability and must discuss the Veteran’s specific background. A detailed explanation (rationale) is required for all opinions provided. (By law, the Board is not permitted to rely on any conclusion that is not supported by a thorough explanation. Providing an opinion or conclusion without a thorough explanation will delay processing of the claim and may also result in a clarification being requested.) VICTORIA MOSHIASHWILI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Williams, 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.