Citation Nr: 21065912 Decision Date: 10/27/21 Archive Date: 10/27/21 DOCKET NO. 17-04 643 DATE: October 27, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disorder, claimed as chronic bronchitis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from April 1974 to June 1974. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeal (Board) on appeal from a March 2016 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In a January 2017 VA Form 9, the Veteran requested a live videoconference hearing at a local VA office. In a September 2021 Report of General Information, the Veteran stated that he was unable to appear at the RO hearing. He also stated that he wished to submit evidence to the judge to make a decision instead of appearing in person or attending a virtual hearing. In an October 2021 Statement in Support of Claim, the Veteran withdrew his request for a hearing and requested that a decision be made based on the evidence of record. The record contains no subsequent evidence that the Veteran wished to proceed with a hearing. As such, the Board finds that the Veteran withdrew his request for a hearing. Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disorder, diagnosed as chronic bronchitis is remanded. The Veteran contends that service connection is warranted a respiratory disorder, namely chronic bronchitis. A May 1974 service treatment record shows that the Veteran presented with complaints of a cold, cough, and vomiting. On assessment, the Veteran's throat was normal, and his lungs were clear. Also, days later, a May 1974 clinical note reveals that the Veteran was diagnosed with an acute respiratory infection. In a January 2017 VA Form 9, the Veteran stated that he was exposed to gas while in basic training. He further noted that he was unable to clear his mask and experienced breathing problems and he started hemorrhaging from his nose and mouth. He reported that he was subsequently hospitalized for a week at Fort Jackson. The Veteran additionally noted that while his treatment records show that he was treated for an upper respiratory infection in May 1974, he was unsure why additional detail was not included regarding the incident that occurred. He also noted that prior to the in-service incident, he did not have problems with his lungs, and that his respiratory condition has continued to worsen over the years. To date, the Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination in conjunction with his claim for a respiratory disorder. Given the in-service notation of a respiratory infection and the Veteran's statements of respiratory problems during service and continuous problems thereafter, a VA examination is warranted to determine whether there is current disability and to obtain a medical nexus opinion as to whether any current disability is related to service. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). Further, the Board notes that the VA treatment records currently associated with the claims file are dated through April 2016. On remand, any outstanding VA treatment records should also be obtained. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO should secure any outstanding relevant VA treatment records and associate them with the Veteran's claims file. The RO should also request that the Veteran provide the names and addresses of any health care providers who have provided treatment for chronic bronchitis (lung disability). After acquiring this information and obtaining any necessary authorization, the RO should obtain and associate these records with the claims file. 2. Then, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with an appropriate clinician, to provide an opinion regarding the etiology of his claimed lung disability. The examiner must note that the claims file was reviewed, and that the lay statements of the Veteran were addressed. After reviewing the claims, the examiner should opine as to the following: (a) Does the Veteran have a current lung disability (to include chronic bronchitis) or any other lung disability? (b) For any diagnosed lung disability including bronchitis, the VA examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., a 50 percent probability, or greater) that such disorder had its onset during service, or is otherwise related to service? For any/all disabilities, note that the lack of documented treatment in service, while probative, cannot serve as the sole basis for a negative finding. The Veteran's lay statements must be considered in making the determination as to whether a nexus exists between service and the current disability. To that end, in rendering the requested opinion, the examiner is instructed to specifically acknowledge the Veteran's assertions of in-service occurrences. Jandreau, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007). A detailed rationale for the opinion must be provided. The examiner is reminded that the term "as likely as not" does not mean "within the realm of medical possibility," but rather that the evidence of record is so evenly divided that, in the examiner's expert opinion, it is as medically sound to find in favor of the proposition as against it. If the examiner is unable to offer the requested opinion, it is essential that the examiner offer a rationale for the conclusion that an opinion could not be provided without resort to speculation, together with a statement as to whether there is additional evidence that could enable an opinion to be provided, or whether the inability to provide the opinion is based on the limits of medical knowledge. See Jones v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 382 (2010). GAYLE STROMMEN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Hanson 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.