Citation Nr: 18142590 Decision Date: 10/17/18 Archive Date: 10/16/18 DOCKET NO. 16-29 313 DATE: October 17, 2018 ORDER The petition to reopen the previously denied claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus is denied. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bladder cancer is remanded. FINDING OF FACT An unappealed January 2013 rating decision denied service connection for diabetes mellitus; new and material evidence was not received prior to expiration of the appeal period; subsequently received evidence includes evidence that is cumulative or redundant and does not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to reopen the claim. CONCLUSION OF LAW The January 2013 rating decision denying the claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus is final; and new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the claim. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5103, 5103A, 5108, 7105(c); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), 20.1103. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1969 to February 1975. He also had service with the National Guard, with verified and various periods of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) and inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA). This case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Reopening Previously Denied Claims 1. Whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen the previously denied claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus. The RO denied reopening the claim for service connection for diabetes in a January 2013 rating decision because there was no indication that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents or that his diabetes was otherwise related to service. VA notified the Veteran of that decision and how to appeal. VA received no appeal or new and material evidence prior to expiration of the appeal period. As such, the January 2013 rating decision became final. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.1103. The Board concludes that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the previously denied claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus. Evidentiary submission received since the January 2013 rating decision includes lay and medical evidence that does not tend to cure any prior evidentiary defect. To the extent that the Veteran argues that he was exposed to herbicides while stationed in Thailand as a fuel specialist, this exposure was considered by the originating agency in its January 2013 rating decision. None of the recent evidentiary submission tend to show that diabetes was incurred in service or is otherwise related to service or that the Veteran had herbicide exposure in Thailand. Also, evidence establishing that C-123 aircraft were serviced by the Veteran while he was stationed Thailand has not been presented. The Veteran’s representative noted that the Veteran’s base in Thailand, Utapao, primarily functioned as a supporting based for B-52 operations. Hence, the evidence is not new or material. Accordingly, the petition to reopen is denied. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran contends that he has hypertension and bladder cancer related to service. Apart from his theory based on herbicide exposure, which is not established or conceded by VA, his statements suggest his disabilities are due handling fuel products while in service. The record establishes that the Veteran worked as a Mobile Refueling Unit Operator and was exposed to fuel, oil, and demineralized water while servicing aircraft. The record further shows diagnoses for hypertension and bladder cancer. Therefore, a VA medical opinion is necessary. See McClendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 81 (2006), The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any hypertension. The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not related to service, including exposure to fuel, oil, and demineralized water while servicing aircraft. Also, indicate whether it at least as likely as not (1) began during active service, (2) manifested within one year after discharge from service. Exposure to herbicide agents is not conceded, so please do not address this theory of entitlement. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any bladder cancer. The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not related to service, including exposure to fuel, oil, and demineralized water while servicing aircraft. Exposure to herbicide agents is not conceded, so please do not address this theory of entitlement. 3. Ensure that the VA medical opinions obtained include a complete rationale. If an opinion cannot be expressed without resort to speculation, ensure that the clinician so indicates and discusses why an opinion is not possible. C.A. SKOW Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD R. Casadei, Counsel