Citation Nr: 18160257 Decision Date: 12/26/18 Archive Date: 12/26/18 DOCKET NO. 16-19 514A DATE: December 26, 2018 ORDER New and material evidence having been received, the issue of service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death is reopened. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The claim for service connection for cause of death was denied in a March 2009 RO rating decision. The appellant did not appeal that decision and it is therefore final. 2. Evidence added to the record since the March 2009 rating decision is not cumulative or redundant of the evidence of record at the time of such decision and raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating the appellant’s claim of cause of death. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The March 2009 RO rating decision that denied service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death is final. 38 U.S.C. § 7104 (b) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1103 (2017). 2. New and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death. 38 U.S.C. § 5108 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (a) (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from November 1968 to March 1969. The Veteran died in October 1994. The appellant is the Veteran’s surviving spouse. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Paul Minnesota. New and material evidence having been received, the issue of service connection for cause of death is reopened The appellant seeks to reopen her claim for service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death. The claim for entitlement to service connection for cause of death may be reopened if new and material evidence is submitted. Manio v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 140 (1991). The appellant filed this application to reopen her claim in August 2014. New evidence means existing evidence that, by itself or when considered with the previous evidence of record, relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim. New and material evidence can be neither cumulative nor redundant of the evidence of record at the time of the last prior final denial of the claim sought to be reopened, and must raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (a) (2017). In determining whether evidence is new and material, the credibility of the new evidence is presumed. Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 510 (1992). The evidence before the VA at the time of the prior final decision consisted of VA treatment records. The appellant subsequently asserted that the Veteran’s cause of death was due to exposure to either Agent Orange or contaminated water while stationed at Fort Lewis, Washington. Following the appellant’s application to reopen the claim, lay statements, Internet research, a Department of Defense response regarding Agent Orange usage, and a memorandum from the Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) were added to the file. This evidence is new and the Board also finds that the new evidence is material. The claim for service connection for cause of death is reopened. REASONS FOR REMAND Entitlement to service connection for cause of death is remanded. As stated above, a JSRRC memorandum has been added to the file. This memorandum reflects that the government could not substantiate the appellant’s allegation that the Veteran was exposure to Agent Orange during his active duty service. However, the appellant has also alleged that the Veteran was exposed to contaminated ground water and, as observed in a July 2017 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC), she submitted a government (Environmental Protection Agency) report showing that activities at Fort Lewis dating from 1967 “had contaminated groundwater with hazardous chemicals.” The Board herein remands this appeal to verify this alleged exposure. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Contact all appropriate records repositories to determine whether the Veteran was exposed to any hazardous chemicals – specifically those identified by the evidence submitted by the appellant – during his service at Fort Lewis. 2. If the Veteran’s exposure is confirmed, obtain a medical opinion to determine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that any such exposure caused or materially contributed to his death. 3. If the benefit sought remains denied, issue the appellant and her representative a supplemental statement of the case and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond before returning this matter to the Board for further appellate review. E. BLOWERS Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Saudiee Brown, Associate Counsel