Citation Nr: 21074546 Decision Date: 12/15/21 Archive Date: 12/15/21 DOCKET NO. 13-18 449A DATE: December 15, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from December 1970 to December 1974 and June 2006 to November 2007 with additional service in the U.S. Air Force Reserves. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2010 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). A virtual Board hearing was held before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in November 2020. A transcript of that hearing is of record. These issues were remanded in Board decisions dated September 2017 and March 2021. 1. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is remanded. Consistent with the March 2021 Board Remand, the Veteran was afforded VA examinations to determine the nature and etiology of his diabetes mellitus and hypertension disabilities. The examiner proffered nexus medical opinions. The Board finds that March 2021 medical opinions are inadequate for rating purposes. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007). Specifically, the examiner checked the box on the medical opinion form which stated that the Veteran's conditions that clearly and unmistakably existed prior to service, was clearly and unmistakably not aggravated beyond its natural progression by an in service injury, event, or illness. The rationale for the negative opinions was that there is no evidence that clearly and unmistakably demonstrates that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus and hypertension was not aggravated by his active - duty periods of service. The Court has held that VA examiners must consider/reconcile lay evidence in rendering an opinion; otherwise, the rationale is deemed inadequate. See Miller v. Wilkie, 32 Vet. App. 249, 262 (2020). Accordingly, the Board finds that remand for addendum medical opinions is warranted. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 270-71 (1998). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Obtain an additional medical opinion to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's diabetes mellitus and hypertension. His claims file (to include this remand) must be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination and that review should be noted. Based on a review of the pertinent medical history and consideration of the lay statements of record the examiner should provide opinions with appropriate rationales responding to the following: (a.) Does the evidence clearly and unmistakably demonstrate (i.e., it is undebatable) that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus was not aggravated by his active - duty periods of service? Why or why not? (b.) Does the evidence clearly and unmistakably demonstrate (i.e., it is undebatable) that the Veteran's hypertension was not aggravated beyond its natural progression by his active - duty periods of service? Why or why not? Jennifer White Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Alexander 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.