Citation Nr: 20022485 Decision Date: 04/01/20 Archive Date: 04/01/20 DOCKET NO. 15-17 451 DATE: April 1, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right lung disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active military service from November 1968 to May 1972 and from January 1975 to December 1991. This case comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2014 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In August 2018 the Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing in front of the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the claim file. The Board finds that more development is necessary prior to final adjudication of the claim on appeal. The Board notes that VA is obligated to provide an examination when the record contains competent evidence that the claimant has a current disability or signs and symptoms of a current disability, the record indicates that the disability or signs and symptoms of disability may be associated with active service; and the record does not contain sufficient information to make a decision on the claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A (d) (2012). The threshold for finding a link between current disability and disease or injury in service is low. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). The Veteran contends that his current right lung disability was incurred during service as he had in-service chemical exposures due to his service in both Vietnam and during the Persian Gulf War. In an August 2018 correspondence, a private physician opined that it was at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s lung disease was a result of his in-service chemical exposure. Notably, the Veteran has yet to undergo a VA examination in conjunction with his claimed right lung disability. An examination or opinion is necessary to make a decision on a claim if the evidence of record contains competent evidence that the claimant has a current disability, and indicates that the disability or symptoms may be associated with the claimant’s active military history, but does not contain sufficient medical evidence to make a decision on the claim. See 38 U.S.C. § 5103A (d) (2); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c) (4). Accordingly, the Board finds that he should be scheduled for a VA examination and opinion to determine whether the Veteran has a current lung disability that is related to service. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Veteran should be requested to provide the names, addresses and approximate dates of treatment of all medical care providers, VA and non-VA, who have treated him for the disability on appeal. After the Veteran has signed the appropriate releases, those records should be obtained and associated with the claims folder. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the etiology of the claimed right lung disability. Based on a review of the record and an examination of the Veteran, the examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that a right lung disability arose during service or are otherwise related to any incident of service to include exposure from chemical agents as the Veteran served on active duty for two different service periods from November 1968 to May 1972 which included service in Vietnam, and from January 1975 to December 199 which included service in the Persian Gulf. In making this determination, the examiner should specifically address the August 2018 correspondence of a private physician in which he opined that it was at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s lung disease was a result of his in-service chemical exposure. Adequate reasons and bases for any opinion rendered must be provided. All studies deemed appropriate in the medical opinion of the examiner should be performed, and all the findings should be set forth in detail. The claims file should be made available to the examiner, who should review the entire claims folder in conjunction with this examination. 3. Thereafter, readjudicate the issue on appeal. If any benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be provided with a Supplemental Statement of the Case and be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond. The case should then be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if otherwise in order. MICHAEL LANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board James A. DeFrank, 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.