Citation Nr: 21003161 Decision Date: 01/19/21 Archive Date: 01/19/21 DOCKET NO. 17-09 503 DATE: January 19, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right shoulder disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 1953 to May 1975. This matter was previously adjudicated by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) in a May 2018 decision. In that decision, the Board denied the Veteran’s claim for entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease, left shoulder strain, and right shoulder strain. See May 2018 Board Decision. The Veteran appealed the Board’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). Unfortunately, during the pendency of that appeal, the Veteran died in February 2019. Within a year of the Veteran’s death, the Veteran’s daughter filed an application to be substituted for her father regarding the appeal before the Court, and the Court granted that request. Accordingly, the Veteran’s daughter became the Appellant before the Court, and now the Board. In August 2020, the Court granted a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) and vacated and remanded that part of the May 2018 Board decision which denied the Veteran’s claims. The JMPR noted that the Board’s May 2018 decision erred in failing to ensure appropriate development was conducted by the AOJ to verify the Veteran’s assertions of herbicide agent exposure during service, failing to obtain outstanding private treatment records pertaining to the Veteran’s shoulder disabilities, and relying on an inadequate August 2014 nexus opinion. See August 2020 CAVC Decision. 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral shoulder strain is remanded. As noted above, the Veteran’s claim for service connection for a bilateral shoulder strain was remanded by the Court in August 2020 for action consistent with the terms of the parties’ JMPR. The parties agreed the Board failed to ensure that VA made reasonable efforts to obtain identified outstanding private treatment records pertaining to the Veteran’s shoulder surgeries in the 1970s and 1990s, and to obtain an adequate VA examination that addressed the Veteran’s lay statements and reports of pain during service for his shoulder disabilities. The Board will thus remand the matter to comply with the terms of the JMPR. 2. Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease is remanded. The Veteran had argued before the Board that his coronary artery disease warrants presumptive service connection due to herbicide exposure while serving in Thailand and Vietnam. In the JMPR, the parties agreed that the Board erred in failing to ensure appropriate development was conducted by the AOJ to verify the reported exposure. In particular, the parties agreed that no efforts were made to attempt to verify the Veteran’s reports of exposure to herbicide agents when he stopped in Cam Ranh Bay in the Republic of Vietnam upon his return to Thailand after taking leave during the holidays in 1969 to 1970. The parties also noted that the Veteran had requested his Air Force flight logs, but the request was not addressed. Therefore, consistent with the terms of the 2020 JMPR, on remand, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) should ensure that appropriate efforts are made to verify the Veteran’s reports of stopping at Cam Ranh Bay, to include attempting to obtain relevant Air Force flight logs. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Undertake appropriate development to include contacting the JSRRC, to ascertain whether the Veteran stopped at Cam Ranh Bay when traveling back to U-Tapao after leave between June or July 1969 and during “the holidays” between 1969 and 1970. See February 2017 Attachment to VA Form 9; November 2017 Statement; April 2014 Report of General Information. As part of such efforts, the AOJ should attempt to obtain relevant Air Force flight logs from that period. All efforts to obtain information regarding a stopover in Vietnam must be documented in the record. 2. Attempt to obtain the Veteran’s outstanding VA treatment records to include records from the Veteran’s bilateral shoulder surgeries in 1970s and 1990s. See February 2017 Attachment to VA Form 9; August 2014 VA Shoulder Examination. If unavailable, notify the Veteran in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. 3. After the development requested in paragraph 2 is completed to the extent possible, obtain an addendum medical opinion by an appropriate VA clinician to determine the nature and etiology of his current bilateral shoulder condition. Is it at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) that the bilateral shoulder condition was incurred in or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s active duty service? As directed in the 2020 JMPR, the examiner must specifically address the following evidence: (1) an August 1967 service treatment record reflecting his report of shoulder pain for five months. See July 1980 STR pp. 3, 7 (August 1967 orthopedic consult); (2) the Veteran’s October 1980 complaint of shoulder pain (see October 1980 Examination); (3) reports of shoulder pain during service (see July 1980 STR pp. 20, 110; see also July 1980 STR p. 10 (Sept. 1969 STR Chronological Report of Medical History; Sept. 1967 STR; July 1974 STR Separation Report of Medical Examination)); and (4) assertions that the Veteran underwent bilateral shoulder surgery in the 1970s and 1990s (See February 2017 Attachment to VA Form 9; August 2014 VA Shoulder Examination). The examiner is advised that the Veteran is to be considered competent to make statements regarding pain. A. S. CARACCIOLO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Emily A. Kotroco 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.