HYPERTENSION

Summary

The Veteran, an Army Veteran who served from October 1967 to July 1970, appeals the denial of service connection for hypertension, diabetes mellitus type II, and ischemic heart disease. The Veteran contends these conditions are due to herbicide exposure during service, specifically while serving near the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). The Board noted that while the Veteran's unit was not explicitly identified by the Department of Defense as operating in the DMZ during the relevant period for presumptive herbicide exposure under 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6), a newer statute (38 U.S.C. § 1116B) allows for presumptive service connection if the Veteran served in or near the Korean DMZ between September 1967 and August 1971. The Board reviewed the Veteran's testimony, finding it thorough, credible, and consistent with his service, including daily surveying missions near the DMZ and sleeping in tents close to the DMZ. Military records confirmed his service in Korea during the period and his duties as a radio telephone operator and artillery surveyor, with treatment at Camp Saint Barbara. The Board conceded in-service herbicide agent exposure based on the Veteran's credible testimony and the finding that he served "in or near" the DMZ. Given the conceded exposure and the Veteran's current diagnoses of hypertension, diabetes mellitus type II, and ischemic heart disease, which are presumptively associated with herbicide exposure, service connection was granted for all three conditions on a presumptive basis.

Rationale

Veteran served in Korea near DMZ during period of herbicide application.; Conceded in-service herbicide exposure.; Hypertension is presumptively associated with herbicide exposure.

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040231
Decision Date: 04/29/26	Archive Date: 04/29/26

DOCKET NO. 250401-533817
DATE: April 29, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is granted.

Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus is granted.

Entitlement to service connection for ischemic heart disease is granted.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, he served "in or near" the Korean DMZ in multiple instances between February 1968 and February 1969 such that in-service herbicide agent exposure is conceded.

2.  The Veteran is currently diagnosed with hypertension, diabetes mellitus type II, and ischemic heart disease, which are presumptively associated with his conceded in-service herbicide agent exposure.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for service connection for hypertension have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1116, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309.

2. The criteria for service connection for diabetes mellitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1116, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309.

3. The criteria for service connection for ischemic heart disease have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1116, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served on active duty from October 1967 to July 1970.

In the April 2025 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Hearing docket. A Board hearing was held on January 7, 2026.

Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the Octobre 2024 and November 2024 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decisions on appeal, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran or his representative at the hearing or within 90 days following the hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.302(a). If evidence was submitted either (1) during the period after the AOJ issued the decision on appeal and prior to the Board hearing, or (2) more than 90 days following the hearing, the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.302(a), 20.801. 

Photographs and statements were received in March 2026, which the Board considered.

The Veteran seeks service connection for hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and ischemic heart disease due to alleged herbicide exposure in service. Specifically, he contends that he served at the Korean demilitarized zone (DMZ). 

A veteran who during active military, naval, or air service served between April 1, 1968 and August 31, 1971 in a unit that, as determined by the Department of Defense (DOD), operated in or near the Korean DMZ in an area in which herbicides are known to have been applied during that period, shall be presumed to have been exposed during such service to an herbicide agent, unless there is affirmative evidence to establish that the veteran was not exposed to any such agent during that service. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6). Once exposure has been established by the evidence, the presumptions found at 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e) are applicable.

DOD has confirmed that herbicide agents were used from April 1968 through July 1969 along the Korean DMZ to defoliate the fields of fire between the frontline defensive positions and the south barrier fence. The treated area was a strip of land 151 miles long and up to 350 yards wide from the fence to north of the civilian control line. Under the development instructions, if it is determined that a Veteran who served in Korea during the time period belonged to one of the units identified by DOD, then it was presumed that he or she was exposed to herbicides containing Agent Orange, and the presumptions outlined in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e) would apply. See VA M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual (M21-1) Part VIII, Subpart i, Ch.1, Sec. B. 

The
iate the fields of fire between the frontline defensive positions and the south barrier fence. The treated area was a strip of land 151 miles long and up to 350 yards wide from the fence to north of the civilian control line. Under the development instructions, if it is determined that a Veteran who served in Korea during the time period belonged to one of the units identified by DOD, then it was presumed that he or she was exposed to herbicides containing Agent Orange, and the presumptions outlined in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e) would apply. See VA M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual (M21-1) Part VIII, Subpart i, Ch.1, Sec. B. 

The Veteran served in Korea during the requisite period, but he did not serve in a unit identified by DOD. See id. Therefore, he does not meet the criteria for presumptive exposure under 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(iv).

However, this does not end the matter. Congress enacted a statute which became effective January 1, 2020, and which provides that a veteran who suffers from one of the diseases specified in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e) is entitled to presumptive service connection if the veteran "served in or near the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ), during the period beginning on September 1, 1967, and ending on August 31, 1971." 38 U.S.C. § 1116B(a)(2). The above-referenced regulations provide criteria which, if met, will result in the presumption that a veteran was "in or near" the DMZ for purposes of the statute, but do not preclude finding that a veteran who did not serve in one of the units also had service "in or near" the DMZ such that exposure to herbicide agents would be presumed. Therefore, the Board must still determine whether there is an approximate balance of evidence on the issue of whether this Veteran served "in or near" the Korean DMZ. (The Board notes that there are numerous unpublished opinions by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims that adopt this interpretation.) 

The Veteran credibly testified that he was stationed at Camp Saint Barbara which was located six kilometers from the DMZ and that he was sent on daily missions for surveying, which required going through vegetation. He testified that there were four different batteries and that one would remain at the DMZ ready for any activities from the north, so the survey teams were tasked with surveying weapon positions at least two different times. He contends that he received combat pay for those days, and he submitted photographs that he contends were from this time. Finally, he testified that he was regularly conducting surveying duties in target areas that were cleared from vegetation.  

In a separate statement he submitted when the evidentiary period was open, he stated that survey teams would spend weeks performing various types of position surveys which required clearing vegetation first to take angular and distance measurements. They were also tasked with traveling to the DMZ to survey gun positions for the gun batteries. Additionally, they were tasked to take part in gun calibration exercises that required the survey teams to spend weeks surveying in new gun positions and sleep in tents near the DMZ. 

The Veteran's service and personnel records show that he served in Korea from February 1968 to February 1969, and his principal duties were listed as "radio telephone operator" and "survey computer." His DD 214 lists "artillery surveyor" for his MOS and his service treatment records show that he was treated at Camp Saint Barbara. 

VA made several attempts to verify his contentions. A September 2024 Military Records Research Center response indicates that unit histories were reviewed and that Camp Saint Barbara was located approximately two miles north of the 38th parallel. The 1968 Eighth US Army chronology revealed that "the UNC may use defoliants to clear underbrush from fields of fire in the DMZ." There was no evidence regarding specific duties performed by the Veteran's unit along the DMZ. 

The Board finds that the Veteran's testimony was extremely thorough and that the details of his duties were consistent with the nature and circumstances of his service in Korea, including his training, education, and MOS. The undersigned had the opportunity to formally observe the Veteran at the January 2026 Board hearing and finds that his testimony was credible. See Arneson v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 379, 382-383 (2011) (noting that "the assessment of the credibility of the veteran's sworn testimony is a function for the [Board]"). Therefore, resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that his duties placed him at (i.e., "in or near") the Korean DMZ in multiple
 that the Veteran's testimony was extremely thorough and that the details of his duties were consistent with the nature and circumstances of his service in Korea, including his training, education, and MOS. The undersigned had the opportunity to formally observe the Veteran at the January 2026 Board hearing and finds that his testimony was credible. See Arneson v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 379, 382-383 (2011) (noting that "the assessment of the credibility of the veteran's sworn testimony is a function for the [Board]"). Therefore, resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that his duties placed him at (i.e., "in or near") the Korean DMZ in multiple instances between February 1968 and February 1969. Accordingly, in-service herbicide agent exposure is conceded. 

If a veteran was exposed to herbicide agents during active service and diabetes mellitus type II and ischemic heart disease manifest to a compensable degree any time after such service, the disabilities will be service-connected even though there is no record of such disease during service. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a)(6), 3.309(e). The PACT Act also added hypertension to the presumptive list of diseases associated with exposure to herbicide agents. See Pub. L. 117-168, § 404(c). The evidence shows that he has current diagnoses of hypertension, diabetes mellitus type II, and ischemic heart disease. Accordingly, service connection is warranted on a presumptive basis, and the Veteran's claims for service connection for hypertension, diabetes mellitus type II, and ischemic heart disease are granted.

 

 

MICHELLE L. KANE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	M. Lavan

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.