Source: https://veteranclaims.net/2019/01/29/procopio-v-wilkie-no-2017-1821decided-january-29-2019-unambiguous-language-of-38-u-s-c-%C2%A7-1116-agent-orange-act1991-prostate-cancer-diabetes-mellitus/
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 04:21:59+00:00

Document:
LLP, Washington, DC, argued for claimant-appellant.
B. WELLS, Law Office of John B. Wells, Slidell, LA.
of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC.
Veterans and Military Law Section, Federal Bar Association.
Also represented by WILLIAM DAVID MAXWELL.
Chartered, Topeka, KS, for amicus curiae Joseph A.
represented by JAMES DANIEL RIDGWAY.
by JACOB ANDERSON, ERIN GIBSON.
Veterans Legal Services Program, Washington, DC.
O’MALLEY, REYNA, WALLACH, TARANTO, and STOLL join.
Concurring opinion filed by Circuit Judge LOURIE.
Concurring opinion filed by Circuit Judge O’MALLEY.
Vietnam War-era service in the United States Navy.
Republic of Vietnam, (“foot-on-land” requirement). Gen.
could not meet the government’s foot-on-land requirement.
the Republic of Vietnam. Id. at 1172.
Haas v. Peake, 544 F.3d 1306 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
cancer is listed in the pertinent regulation, 38 C.F.R.
Republic of Vietnam’s territorial sea. J.A. 32, 49-52.
Documentary History, Volume I: 1940-1956 (1971).
1958 Convention, art. 1(1), 15 U.S.T. 1606, T.I.A.S. No.
Part II, arts. 2, 3, 1833 U.N.T.S. 397, 400 (Dec. 10, 1982).
these generalist dictionaries and maps.
sea.3 The government has pointed to no law to the contrary.
against which Congress adopted the Agent Orange Act.
of the “Republic of Vietnam,” is entitled to § 1116’s presumption.
the Republic of Vietnam” in 1991.
land requirement. We are not persuaded.
or visitation in the Republic of Vietnam.
the government’s current foot-on-land requirement.
did before § 1116 was adopted.
waters “can also include beyond the territorial seas”); id.
and territorial sea by international law).
in 1997, six years after the Act. Gen. Counsel Prec.
would not be entitled to service connection under § 1116.
for Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma without explanation.
Regulation 313 to articulate a foot-on-land requirement.
and Education Amendments of 1980, Pub. L.
in the waters adjacent to Vietnam”); 38 U.S.C.
borders thereof, or in the waters adjacent thereto”).
at 26:50-27:18 (Mr. Procopio); id. at 55:00–55:15 (government).
Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver Cty. Employees Ret. Fund, 138 S. Ct.
provision’s meaning. For instance, in 16 U.S.C.
generally include its territorial sea.
the meaning of statutes.” Monell v. Dep’t of Social Servs.
Brown v. Gardner, 513 U.S. 115, 117-18 (1994); King v.
we have no reason to reach this issue.
whether the agency’s interpretation is unreasonable.
national culture”)), no such reliance concern exists here.
is clear, that is the end of the matter.” Chevron, 467 U.S.
or that Mr. Procopio should be denied his benefits.
LOURIE, Circuit Judge, concurring in the judgment.
phrase “served in the Republic of Vietnam” in 38 U.S.C.
when it enacted the Agent Orange Act. See Haas v.
necessary and decides an issue not before us.
to that issue, the statute surely is ambiguous.
ambiguous.”). Contra Haas, 525 F.3d at 1186–97.
Vietnam.” 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(iii) (emphasis added).
should simply read the plain language of the regulation.
entitled to presumptive service connection.
I agree with the majority’s well-reasoned decision.
at step one of Chevron. 467 U.S. at 843 n.9.
Congress’s meaning.” SAS Inst., Inc. v. Iancu, 138 S.
F.3d 1168, 1186 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
the backdrop of existing law’” (citation omitted)).
be ambiguous. Christensen v. Harris County, 529 U.S.
one such traditional tool. Henderson v. Shinseki, 562 U.S.
underlies the entire veterans benefit scheme. Barrett v.
against the backdrop of Boone. King, 502 U.S. at 220 n.9.
and the pro-veteran canon pulled in opposite directions.
reading. 727 F.3d 1161, 1169–70 (Fed. Cir. 2013).
resolve any apparent ambiguity, it will not always do so.
legal doctrines when exercising it.
(2018) (Kennedy, J., concurring); see also Michigan v.
questions.” Michigan, 135 S. Ct. at 2712.
raises serious questions regarding separation of powers.
conflicts with the pro-veteran canon of construction.
operate within the bounds of reasonable interpretation.
Certain Disabilities, and Related Matters, 69 Fed. Reg.
and seemed to take in its Adjudication Manual[.]”).
come to a head, agency deference must yield.
lenity, it has treated the pro-veteran canon more favorably.
the nation.” Boone, 319 U.S. at 575.
provisions interpreted to their benefit.” Montana v.
United States and the Indians.” Id.
pro-Indian canon trumps agency deference under Chevron.
Cobell v. Norton, 240 F.3d 1081, 1101 (D.C. Cir.
deference to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes.”).
The same should be true in this context.
are entitled to special benefits from a grateful nation.
Mr. Procopio, even after returning home, are still fighting.
served in the territorial waters of Vietnam.
with at this very time.
history, that this statutory phrase is ambiguous. See id.
undermines the principle of stare decisis.
be covered by the presumption of service connection.
that the phrase was ambiguous. Id. at 1184.
important purpose in American law. See Deckers Corp. v.
marks and citation omitted) (alteration in original).
John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States, 552 U.S.
another try at statutory construction . . . .” Watson v.
made on both sides.” Lighting Ballast Control LLC v.
Philips Elecs. N. Am. Corp., 744 F.3d 1272, 1283 (Fed.
Cir. 2014) (en banc), abrogated by Teva Pharm. USA, Inc.
v. Sandoz, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 831 (2015) (quoting Morrow v.
response to this court’s interpretation.
conclude that the statutory phrase at issue is ambiguous.
concluded that the statutory phrase was ambiguous.
as part of the definition of the country itself.
it existed, would have done otherwise.
reunified in 1976. [pop] 64,000,000; 126,104 sq. mi.
divided 1954–75 into North Vietnam and South Vietnam .
with Alas. & Hawaii; 3,615,211 sq. mi. (9,376,614 sq.
include a country’s territorial waters, it does so expressly.
nation’s formal name in the statute. See 10 U.S.C.
void or insignificant.”’” Corley v. United States, 556 U.S.
Construction § 46.06 pp. 181–186 (rev. 6th ed. 2000))).
C, § 604, 110 Stat. 3009 (1996) (codified at 8 U.S.C.
asylum in accordance with this section . . . .”); 16 U.S.C.
“only the States and the District of Columbia”).
waters or seas is speculative and entirely unconvincing.
See Majority Op. at 14–15.
twelve nautical miles from the shore.
but it misunderstands the history behind each rule.
exposure to dioxin-containing herbicides. Id. at 2725.
those stationed outside of Vietnam.
non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma than non-Vietnam veterans.
of service involved duty or visitation in Vietnam.
different purposes between the regulations.
be based on actual exposure to herbicides during the war.
Gov’t Relations, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. 22, 41 (1990)).
for any of these diseases listed in § 3.311a.
that the VA intended this interpretation.
offshore veterans are subject to a foot-on-land requirement.
of Vietnam. See Haas, 525 F.3d at 1184.
statute into an unambiguous one.
Under Secretary, Benefits Department, Veterans’ Affairs).
rather, that policy choice should be left to Congress.
new report predicted to become available next April.
Haas’ treatment of step two of Chevron.

References: v. 
 art. 1
 § 1116
 § 1116
 § 1116
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v.

 § 3
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.

v. 
 v.

 v. 
 § 46
 § 604
 § 3