Citation Nr: 21072626 Decision Date: 12/03/21 Archive Date: 12/03/21 DOCKET NO. 13-09 166A DATE: December 3, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for type II diabetes mellitus, to include hypoglycemia and as secondary to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for diabetic neuropathy in the right lower extremity, to include as secondary to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for diabetic neuropathy in the left lower extremity, to include as secondary to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for peripheral vascular disease in the right lower extremity, to include as secondary to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for peripheral vascular disease in the left lower extremity, to include as secondary to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for ulcers in the right lower extremity, to include as secondary to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for ulcers in the left lower extremity, to include as secondary to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for migraine headaches, to include as secondary to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension, to include as secondary to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from September 1962 to September 1966. These matters come on appeal before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a January 2011 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional office (RO). In December 2015, the Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing held before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge and a transcript of that hearing has been associated with the electronic claims file. In March 2016, the Board remanded the claims for further development. In November 2017, the Board denied the claims on appeal. The Veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (the Court). In a January 2019 order, the Court granted a joint motion for partial remand. In June 2019, the Board remanded the claims for further development. In a statement to his congressman that was received in January 2021, the Veteran essentially argued that his attorney who represented him at the Court established that he served in Vietnam. By the same token, in a November 2021 statement, the Veteran in essence argued that his Court attorney has proof showing that it was concluded three years ago that he served in Vietnam. The Board notes that joint motion for partial remand does not establish that the Veteran served in Vietnam. Instead, the joint motion for partial remand provides that further development is necessary in determining whether the Veteran served in Vietnam. Though the Board has listed the issues of entitlement to service connection for ulcers of the lower extremities as part of the issues of entitlement to service connection for peripheral vascular disease of the lower extremities, his December 2009 claim shows that the Veteran is claiming leg ulcers as a separate disability from peripheral vascular disease. In contrast, March and August 2010 statements from the Veteran suggest that his hypoglycemia was a symptom of his diabetes. As such, the issues are as stated on the first page of this remand. The June 2019 Board remand directed the RO to obtain outstanding VA treatment records. A November 2019 report of general information reflects that the Veteran reported being treated at the Decatur VA Medical Center starting in January 1995. The RO did not attempt to obtain treatment records dated back to January 1995. Therefore, the RO did not comply with the directives of the June 2019 Board remand. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Moreover, the VA treatment records dated up to August 2015 appear to be incomplete. For example, an August 2010 VA treatment record reveals that the problem list indicates that hypertension was evaluated in March 1998. The March 1998 treatment record is not of record though the RO has obtained records dated as early as January 1998. Similarly, the Veteran underwent an Agent Orange registry examination in January 2010 but that examination report is not of record. The RO should obtain all treatment records from the Atlanta VA Health Care System for the periods from January 1995 to August 2015 and from April 2021 to the present. The Veteran's service treatment records reflect that he had an elevated blood pressure reading on his August 1962 enlistment examination 130/80. A VA examination is necessary to determine whether the Veteran's hypertension preexisted active service and whether his hypertension was related to his elevated blood pressure reading noted on the August 1962 enlistment examination. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to identify all treatment for his hypertension, diabetes mellitus, diabetic neuropathy of the lower extremities, peripheral vascular disease of the lower extremities, leg ulcers, and headaches and obtain any identified records. Obtain the Veteran's VA treatment records from the Atlanta VA Health Care System for the periods from January 1995 to August 2015 and from April 2021 to the present. Obtain a copy of the report of the Veteran's VA Agent Orange Registry examination, which was completed on January 25, 2010, at the Atlanta VA Medical Center. 2. After the development in 1 is completed, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of hypertension. The examiner must opine on whether it is clear and unmistakable (undebatable) that hypertension preexisted the Veteran's period of active duty from September 1962 to September 1966. If the examiner finds hypertension did clearly and unmistakably (undebatably) preexist the Veteran's period of active duty from September 1962 to September 1966, the examiner must opine whether it is clear and unmistakable (undebatable) that hypertension was not aggravated by the Veteran's period of active duty from September 1962 to September 1966. If the examiner finds that hypertension did not clearly and unmistakably preexist the Veteran's period of active duty from September 1962 to September 1966, the examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not that hypertension is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease during his period of active duty from September 1962 to September 1966, including the elevated blood pressure reading on the August 1962 enlistment examination. 3. After the development in 1is completed, the RO should undertake any necessary development on the other service connection claims as warranted by any additional evidence of record. 4. After development above has been completed, the RO should readjudicate the Veteran's claims with consideration of all evidence of record. If any claim remains denied, the Veteran should be issued a supplemental statement of the case, with a copy to his representative, and afforded an opportunity to respond. MICHAEL LANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Cherry, 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.