Citation Nr: 21064432 Decision Date: 10/20/21 Archive Date: 10/20/21 DOCKET NO. 16-58 962 DATE: October 20, 2021 REMANDED The claim of entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served in the Army National Guard between 1963 and 1984. He served on active duty from February 1964 until August 1967. He died in 2009. The appellant is his surviving spouse. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a rating decision by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In August 2019, the appellant testified before the Board in a hearing convened at the RO. A transcript of the hearing is included in the electronic claims file and has been reviewed. In December 2019, the Board remanded the claim on appeal for additional development. Another remand is warranted in order to complete that development. Specifically, two matters need to be addressed further. First, the Board requested in the remand that the RO address a November 2001 VA Form 21-526, Application for Compensation and/or Pension. On the form, two boxes appear to the checked one states "compensation" while the other states "pension". The form notes hypertension, heart disease, lung disease, and bacterial endocarditis. In any event, the copy of the claim form currently in the electronic file indicates that the box checked "compensation" was later covered. Ultimately, the RO processed the form as a claim for pension, which was denied in an unappealed November 2001 decision. During the Board hearing, the appellant indicated that the claim in 2001 may have been a claim for compensation. The matter should be considered and addressed by the RO. Second, an addendum medical opinion should be provided along with the August 2021 VA report now in the record. The opinion addresses most of the Board's remand inquiry but is incomplete in certain respects. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Return the case to the VA examiner who provided the August 2021 report, or to a suitable substitute, for issuance of an addendum opinion addressing the claim of entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death. After reviewing the claims file, the examiner should again answer the following question: Is it at least as likely as not (i.e., probability of 50 percent or greater) that service-connected disability contributed substantially or materially to the Veteran's death? In answering this question: -Detail to what extent heart disease and diabetes mellitus type 2 factored into death. -Address what affect exposure to chemicals (e.g., aerosols) had on death. -Address whether herbicides could have factored into death. It is true that research has not uncovered evidence showing the presence of herbicides at the Veteran's command in Japan in the 1960s. It is correct that evidence of herbicides in Japan in the 1960s is minimal. Nevertheless, the record contains an article received in August 2019 indicating herbicides storage in Japan around the time of the Veteran's service there. Thus, the examiner should offer an opinion addressing what effect any exposure could have had on death, even if the cause of death is not currently service connected. For example, if you find that heart disease and/or diabetes contributed substantially or materially to the Veteran's death, what effect would exposure to herbicides have on heart disease and diabetes? (Continued on the next page) -Address whether asbestos exposure may have led to the pulmonary disorder which eventually caused death, according to the death certificate. The examiner stated earlier that the record contains no evidence of asbestosis, but an opinion should specifically address the lung disorder involved in death. 2. Readjudicate the claim and in doing so address the November 2001 claim and the extent to which it may have been a claim for compensation. G. A. WASIK Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Christopher McEntee 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.