Citation Nr: 20003844 Decision Date: 01/16/20 Archive Date: 01/15/20 DOCKET NO. 19-19 662 DATE: January 16, 2020 REMANDED Service connection for congestive heart failure (claimed as a heart condition) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND Service connection for congestive heart failure (claimed as heart condition) is remanded. Initially, in July 2019, the Veteran submitted together a VA Form 9 (substantive appeal) and an Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) VA Form 20-0996 requesting Higher-Level Review by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). The rating decision on appeal is a December 2018 rating decision denying service connection for congestive heart failure, there is no AMA rating decision of record adjudicating the current matter on appeal. In August 2018 correspondence, VA informed the Veteran that the July 2019 request for Higher-Level Review could not be processed and he was informed that he could withdraw his appeal to the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) through a written statement. Neither the Veteran nor his representative have communicated his intent to have this appeal withdrawn, accordingly, the July 2019 substantive appeal confers jurisdiction on the Board and the matter will be adjudicated. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in connection with this claim in October 2018. The examiner offered a negative nexus opinion stating that there was no record of any heart condition or treatment for a heart condition during service. The Board finds the October 2018 VA medical opinion to be inadequate and ultimately of little probative value. In this regard, it appears that the examiner’s opinion was based solely on the lack of documented treatment in service. See Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23 (2007) (wherein the Court determined an examination was inadequate because the examiner did not comment on the Veteran’s report of in-service exposure to jet fuels and other toxins and, instead, relied on the absence of evidence in his service treatment records to provide a negative opinion). Moreover, the examiner’s opinion did not address the specifics of this Veteran’s case (referred to in the remand directives section below). Additional development must be undertaken to obtain an adequate VA medical opinion. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain all updated records (i.e., those not already of record) of VA and adequately identified private treatment the Veteran has received for the disabilities on appeal. 2. Obtain an opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether the Veteran’s congestive heart failure, is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) related to his active duty service. *The examiner MUST SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS what impact the Veteran’s prolonged exposure to jet fuels (including JP-8) and other benzene-based products while working as mechanic in the Air Force may have had on the subsequent onset of his congestive heart failure. The examiner must provide a comprehensive opinion including complete rationales for all conclusions reached and take note of the fact that any negative opinion MAY NOT be based solely on the lack of documented evidence of reports of or treatment for the claimed disability in the service treatment records, i.e., the opinion must also consider the Veteran’s history as stated at the examination and otherwise in the record. VICTORIA MOSHIASHWILI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Kyle McKone 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.