Citation Nr: 21070035 Decision Date: 11/22/21 Archive Date: 11/22/21 DOCKET NO. 15-29 955 DATE: November 22, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for ischemic heart disease, to include as due to exposure to herbicide agents is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from January 1968 to January 1969. The matter was previously before the Board in October 2019 at which time it was remanded for development. While the Board regrets the further delay, for the reasons stated below, additional remand is necessary. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Entitlement to service connection for ischemic heart disease, to include as due to exposure to herbicide agents is remanded. In its October 2019 remand, the Board requested verification from the former Joint Services Record Research Center (JSRRC) of the Veteran's exposure to herbicides in Okinawa, Japan. The agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) obtained a partial response in December 2020. The JSRRC verified that members of the 58th Supply Company had the mission of receiving, storing processing and issuing heavy material to include combat, tactical and special purpose vehicles: and fortification and construction supplies, to divisions and non-divisional direct support units. The 2nd Logistical Command OR-LL documents equipment was received from Vietnam to be stored, processed, and re-issued. Thus, the Board finds that the Veteran's credible statements about coming into contact with uniforms and clothing, personal belongings, and other equipment from deceased soldiers and others in Vietnam during the Vietnam War are corroborated and potential secondary exposure to herbicides from contact with the uniforms and equipment is established. The Board also requested an opinion from an epidemiologist as to whether or not the Veteran could have been exposed to herbicide agents in the completion of his duties. After numerous attempts, the AOJ determined there were no epidemiologists available to provide the requested opinion. Thus, the AOJ could not obtain an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents in October 1968 by touching the clothing and other property of military personnel who had been in the Republic of Vietnam at a time when they were presumed to have been exposed to herbicide agents. The Board finds there was substantial compliance with this aspect of the remand. However, having determined that the Veteran had secondary exposure to herbicides, a medical opinion is still necessary to determine if that exposure was the cause of his IHD, given that it is not direct exposure to herbicides. Thus, the Board finds that further remand is required. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain an opinion from a qualified examiner regarding the etiology of the Veteran's IHD. The claims file must be made available to the examiner. The examiner is requested to review all pertinent records associated with the claims file, including the Veteran's service treatment records, post-service medical records, and assertions. A clear explanation for all opinions based on specific facts for the case as well as relevant medical principles is needed. If an examination is deemed necessary, one must be provided. The examiner must consider the Veteran's October 2018 statement, where he reported that he was secondarily exposed to herbicide agents during his active-duty service in Okinawa, Japan when he was assigned to the 58th Supply Company in October 1968. The Veteran stated that he was assigned to work in a storage room in the Machinato Army Depot, and he was responsible for itemizing and separating the personal and military effects of deceased military personnel who had been in the Vietnam Theater. The military property was to be retained, and the personal property was to be packaged so it could be returned to the next of kin. The Veteran's participation in this activity has been established as potential secondary exposure to herbicides. The examiner should note that veterans who served in the Republic of Vietnam during the period beginning on January 9, 1962 and ending on May 7, 1975 are presumed to have been exposed to herbicide agents. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's IHD was caused by secondary exposure to herbicide agents in October 1968 by touching, or being in close proximity to, clothing and equipment sent from Vietnam for storage, processing, and re-issuing at the Mochinato Army Depot. The Veteran is competent to attest to observable symptoms. If there is a medical basis to support or doubt the history provided by the Veteran, the examiner should provide a fully reasoned explanation. 2. Then readjudicate the claim. GAYLE STROMMEN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Sherman Associate 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.