190524-7086

CourtBoard of Veterans' Appeals
DecidedJune 19, 2019
Docket190524-7086
StatusUnpublished

This text of 190524-7086 (190524-7086) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Board of Veterans' Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
190524-7086, (bva 2019).

Opinion

Citation Nr: AXXXXXXXX Decision Date: 06/19/19 Archive Date: 06/19/19

DOCKET NO. 190524-7086 DATE: June 19, 2019

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer is granted.

Entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction as secondary to the prostate cancer also is granted.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Veteran’s prostate cancer was at least as likely as not caused by exposure to contaminated drinking water at Camp LeJeune.

2. The Veteran’s erectile dysfunction was caused by his prostate cancer since a complication.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for service connection for prostate cancer have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307 (2018).

2. The criteria for service connection for erectile dysfunction as secondary to the prostate cancer also have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b) (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.310(a) and (b) (2018).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

On August 23, 2017, the President signed into law the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act, Pub. L. No. 115-55 (to be codified as amended in scattered sections of 38 U.S.C.), 131 Stat. 1105 (2017), also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA). This law creates a new framework for Veterans dissatisfied with VA’s decision on their claim to seek review. To this end the Board is honoring the Veteran’s election to participate in VA’s test program, RAMP, the Rapid Appeals Modernization Program.

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marines Corps from October 1956 to October 1958. He elected to participate in RAMP per his opt-in election of December 2018, in which he selected the Direct Review appeal lane. This review consequently will be based upon the evidence already submitted to VA as of the date of his election, so VA will not seek any additional evidence on his behalf. See RAMP Opt-in Election December 2018. Moreover, the Board is fully granting his claims based on this evidence already in the file.

1. Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer

2. Entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction as secondary to the prostate cancer

Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303. To establish a right to compensation for a present disability, a Veteran must show: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a relevant disease or an injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. See Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (quoting Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004)). Service connection may be granted for any disease initially diagnosed after discharge when the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d).

Secondary service connection may be established for disability that is proximately due to, or the result of, or being aggravated by a service-connected disability. Establishing secondary service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability (for which secondary service connection is sought); (2) an already service-connected disability; and (3) indication the current disability was either (a) caused or (b) is being aggravated by the service-connected disability. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a) and (b); Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439 (1995) (en banc).

Certain chronic diseases, including cancers, may be service connected on a presumptive basis if manifested to a compensable degree within a specified period of time post service (one year for cancer). 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309(a). This presumption is rebuttable by affirmative evidence to the contrary.

Effective March 14, 2017, VA amended 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307 and 3.309 providing a presumption of service connection for certain diseases based on exposure to contaminants in the water supply at Camp Lejeune. Essentially, as amended, 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307 and 3.309 establish a presumption of service connection for Veterans who served at Camp Lejeune for no less than 30 days (consecutive or nonconsecutive) from August 1, 1953 to December 31, 1987, and have a diagnosis of any of the following eight diseases, even though there is no record of such disease during service: kidney cancer, liver cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, adult leukemia, multiple myeloma, Parkinson’s disease, aplastic anemia and other myelodysplastic syndromes, and bladder cancer. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a), 3.309(f). These listed diseases shall have become manifest to a degree of 10 percent or more at any time after service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(7)(ii).

Notably, prostate cancer and erectile dysfunction (ED) are not among the eight listed diseases warranting presumptive service connection. Service connection nonetheless may be established as due to such exposure by affirmative evidence supporting that theory of entitlement, i.e., by establishing direct causation. Combee v. Brown, 34 F.3d 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1994).

The Board must fully consider the lay evidence of record. Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009). A layperson is competent to report on the onset of disability and, when applicable, continuity of his or her current symptomatology. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 470 (1994). Lay evidence can also be competent and sufficient evidence of a diagnosis or to establish etiology if (1) the layperson is competent to identify the medical condition, (2) the layperson is reporting a contemporaneous medical diagnosis, or (3) lay testimony describing symptoms at the time supports a later diagnosis by a medical professional. See Jandreau v.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Davidson v. SHINSEKI
581 F.3d 1313 (Federal Circuit, 2009)
Holton v. Shinseki
557 F.3d 1362 (Federal Circuit, 2009)
Jandreau v. Nicholson
492 F.3d 1372 (Federal Circuit, 2007)
Angel S. Nieves-Rodriguez v. James B. Peake
22 Vet. App. 295 (Veterans Claims, 2008)
Rick K. Kahana v. Eric K. Shinseki
24 Vet. App. 428 (Veterans Claims, 2011)
Gilbert v. Derwinski
1 Vet. App. 49 (Veterans Claims, 1990)
Guerrieri v. Brown
4 Vet. App. 467 (Veterans Claims, 1993)
Layno v. Brown
6 Vet. App. 465 (Veterans Claims, 1994)
Allen v. Brown
7 Vet. App. 439 (Veterans Claims, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
190524-7086, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/190524-7086-bva-2019.