Citation Nr: 21065630 Decision Date: 10/26/21 Archive Date: 10/26/21 DOCKET NO. 15-43 747 DATE: October 26, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is remanded. Service connection for asthma is remanded. Service connection for hypertension is remanded. Service connection for bronchitis is remanded. Service connection for residuals of chicken pox is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1962 to August 1966 and from January 1974 to December 1974. The Veteran testified at hearings before a Veterans' Law Judge in January 2019 and September 2019. Copies of the transcripts are of record. In July 2021, the Veteran was notified that the Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) who conducted his hearings is no longer with the Board. The Veteran was provided the opportunity to appear for another Board hearing, but in August 2021 declined another Board hearing. Thus, the Board will proceed with adjudication. COPD Asthma In this matter, the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) indicate that he had treatment for respiratory conditions while in-service. See November 1963, March 1963, and July 1966 STRs. Additionally, VA records indicate the Veteran was diagnosed with asthma and COPD. See March 2012 VA medical records. In June 2013 the Veteran's treating provide at VA stated that the Veteran had been treating for COPD asthma at the pulmonary clinic of the VA. The VA physician also stated that the Veteran's current COPD and asthma was more likely than not from the Veteran's military service. However, the VA physician stated that the Veteran had diagnosis of COPD and asthma while in-service. The Veteran's STRs, however, do not note diagnosis of COPD or asthma in-service. As such, the Board is unable to afford the June 2013 opinion from the Veteran's VA physician probative weight. Additionally, a June 2013 VA examination did not provide an opinion on direct service connection, rather that examination focused on if there was a link between the Veteran's in-service diagnosis of chicken pox and his respiratory conditions. Finally, an April 2021 VA examination did not address the Veteran's COPD or asthma, but was directed to focus on his sinusitis. As such, the Board finds that a new examination is warranted regarding the etiology of the Veteran's COPD and asthma. Bronchitis The Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination regarding the etiology of his diagnosed bronchitis. Upon review of the record, the Board finds that the low threshold for obtaining such an examination and medical opinion has been surpassed in this case. See 38U.S.C. §5103A(d); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 81 (2006). Hypertension A June 2013 VA examination did not provide an opinion on direct service connection regarding the Veteran's hypertension; that examination focused on if there was a link between the Veteran's in-service diagnosis of chicken pox and his hypertension. The Board finds that a VA examination regarding the etiology of his hypertension in relation to his active duty service is warranted. Residuals of Chicken Pox The Veteran's STRs confirm he contracted chicken pox while on active duty. See December 1962 STR. A VA examination confirmed that the Veteran has hyper and hypopigmented spots on his arms and legs, however the examiner did not indicate if the spots were residuals of the Veteran's chicken pox. See June 2013 VA examination. Additionally, a March 2012 VA medical record diagnosed the Veteran with depigmented macules on his extremities. The June 2013 examiner did not address this medical record. As such, the Board finds that a new examination is warranted. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by a pulmonologist to determine the nature and etiology of his diagnosed COPD, asthma, and bronchitis. The claims file should be made available to the examiner for review. The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's diagnosed COPD, asthma, and bronchitis was incurred in, or due to, the Veteran's service. The examiner is asked to note the February 2001 VA medical record which diagnosed the Veteran with bronchitis and the March 2012 VA medical records which diagnosed the Veteran with COPD and asthma as well as continuing treatment for the conditions documented in the Veteran's VA medical records. The Veteran's lay statements regarding onset and continuity of symptomology, specifically his 2019 hearing testimony, should be recorded and considered. A rationale for all opinions must be provided. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the nature and etiology of his diagnosed hypertension. The claims file should be made available to the examiner for review. The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's diagnosed hypertension was incurred in, or due to, the Veteran's service. The Veteran's lay statements regarding onset and continuity of symptomology, specifically his 2019 hearing testimony, should be recorded and considered. A rationale for all opinions must be provided. 3. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by a dermatologist to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's diagnosed skin depigmentation, hyperpigmentation, and hypopigmentation. The claims file should be made available to the examiner for review. The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's diagnosed skin depigmentation, hyperpigmentation, and hypopigmentation was incurred in, or due to, the Veteran's service, to include the Veteran's documented contraction of chicken pox in-service. The examiner is asked to note the March 2012 VA medical treatment note diagnosing the Veteran with depigmented macules on his extremities as well as the June 2013 VA examination which noted the Veteran's hyperpigmentation and hypopigmentation. The Veteran's lay statements regarding onset and continuity of symptomology, specifically his 2019 hearing testimony, should be recorded and considered. A rationale for all opinions must be provided. JOHN Z. JONES Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Parrish, 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.