Citation Nr: 20007489 Decision Date: 01/29/20 Archive Date: 01/29/20 DOCKET NO. 14-14 548 DATE: January 29, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disorder, including asbestosis and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), to include as due to exposure to asbestos and/or herbicides, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from January 1966 to December 1968. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA or Board) from a November 2011 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran requested a hearing before the Board. The requested hearing was conducted in January 2017 by the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript is associated with the claims file. In March 2018, the Board remanded this claim for additional development. Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disorder, including asbestosis and/or COPD, to include as due to exposure to asbestos and/or herbicides, is remanded. In a January 2020 statement, the Veteran’s representative argued that a study cited in the Agent Orange Update 2011 (2018) reports that in the Army Chemical Corps cohort of Vietnam Veterans, the prevalence of self-reported noncancerous respiratory problems diagnosed by a doctor was significantly increased by about 40 to 60 percent, suggesting a link between herbicide exposure and the development of COPD. Here, the Board notes that personnel records confirm the Veteran served aboard the USS Kitty Hawk, which was in the official waters of Vietnam. Exposure to asbestos has been conceded; a VA medical opinion was obtained in September 2018. Exposure to herbicides has not been conceded; however, as a result of the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act 2019, the presumption of herbicide exposure has been extended to certain Veterans who served in the offshore waters of Vietnam. On remand, development should be completed to determine if the Veteran is entitled to a presumption of exposure to herbicides, and if so, a medical opinion should be obtained as to whether the Veteran’s respiratory disorder is causally or etiologically due to exposure to herbicides. The examiner’s opinion should include consideration of the study cited in the Agent Orange Update 2011, as noted by the Veteran’s representative in January 2020. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Develop the Veteran’s claim in light of the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act 2019. Specifically, determine if the Veteran’s service aboard the USS Kitty Hawk entitles him to a presumption of exposure to herbicides. 2. If it is determined the Veteran was exposed to herbicides during service, obtain an addendum medical opinion. The examiner should opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s COPD is causally or etiologically due to exposure to herbicides during service. *The examiner must address and discuss the study cited in the Agent Orange Update 2011 (2018) that reports the prevalence of self-reported noncancerous respiratory problems diagnosed by a doctor was significantly increased by about 40 to 60 percent in a cohort of Vietnam Veterans, suggesting a link between herbicide exposure and the development of COPD, as noted by the Veteran’s representative in January 2020. *In rendering this opinion, the examiner is advised that the Board is cognizant that there is no VA presumption of service connection for COPD as due to herbicide exposure. The question here is what is the likelihood that this Veteran’s COPD is related to his herbicide exposure given his medical history, family history, other risk factors, etc. All opinions should be supported by a clear rationale, and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. TANYA SMITH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board L. Andersen, Counsel 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.