Citation Nr: 21075085 Decision Date: 12/17/21 Archive Date: 12/17/21 DOCKET NO. 20-16 622 DATE: December 17, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a stroke is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a heart disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1965 to August 1967. In September 2021, the Veteran and his spouse testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A copy of the transcript has been associated with the claims file. The Veteran is seeking entitlement to service connection for residuals of a stroke, diabetes mellitus, and a heart disorder that he believes is due to his military service. Specifically, he testified that it is his belief he was exposed to Agent Orange while stationed in Okinawa, Japan, at Kadena Air Base. In this respect, he testified that he worked at a supply depot near barrels of Agent Orange and the planes that were transporting Agent Orange to and from Vietnam. He also testified that the depot was near the barracks and there was a lot of dead foliage near the perimeter of the base. See September 2021 Board Hearing Transcript. As an initial matter, the record reflects the Veteran has current diagnoses of cerebrovascular infarction, hypertension and coronary atherosclerosis, and diabetes mellitus. See VA Problem List. In support of his claim, the Veteran submitted an October 2017 statement from his treating physician, Dr. S.M., stating it is more likely than not that the diagnosed diabetes mellitus could have been caused by exposure to Agent Orange during his service. However, no rationale was provided. The Veteran also submitted an internet article dated in May 2019, which reported that two other Veterans received compensation from VA as a result of exposure to Agent Orange while stationed in Okinawa during the Vietnam Era. The Veteran also provided the names of two fellow soldiers whom the Veteran believes can attest to his exposure to Agent Orange. However, he was unable to locate those individuals. Therefore, the Board finds that a remand is required to assist the Veteran with obtaining information as it pertains to his alleged exposure to Agent Orange. Further, even if it is found he was not exposed to Agent Orange during service, the Veteran has not been provided VA examinations with regard his claims for service connection. VA's duty to assist includes a duty to provide a medical examination or obtain a medical opinion where it is deemed necessary to make a decision on the claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir 2007). In a claim for service connection, evidence that suggests a nexus but is too equivocal or lacking in specificity to support a decision still triggers the duty to assist if it indicates that the Veteran's condition may be associated with service. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). Therefore, remand is required for the AOJ to schedule the Veteran for these examinations. Finally, the Board notes that neither the Veteran's service treatment records nor his personnel files have been associated with the claims file and a formal finding of unavailability has not been provided. On remand the AOJ must attempt to obtain these records. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran's military personnel records and service treatment records, including his entrance and separation examinations. 2. The RO is asked to obtain any available records from the Department of Defense, or any other appropriate agency regarding the storage and dissemination of chemicals, including Agent Orange, in Okinawa. Specifically, if possible, the request should include how the chemicals were stored, what they were used for, and any movement of the chemicals by service personnel, to include in the supply depot and around the perimeter. If unable to provide this information, it should be documented in the record. 3. The Veteran is to be notified that he may submit lay statements from fellow soldiers or other lay witnesses who have knowledge as to exposure to chemicals or Agent Orange in Okinawa. 4. The AOJ should attempt to contact the two individuals named in the Veteran's hearing testimony, D. Swann and M. Subaro, who were in the same unit as the Veteran and attempt to illicit information from them in order to assist the Veteran. The AOJ should document its actions in the claims file. 5. The RO is then asked to schedule the Veteran for VA examinations for each claimed disorder on appeal to determine the nature and etiology of these disorders, to include on a direct incurrence basis. (a.) For each claimed disorder, the examiner is asked to determine whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's cerebral infarction, diagnosed heart disorders, and diabetes mellitus are related to exposure to environmental contaminants to include all herbicide agents and/ or chemicals. (b.) If exposure is not found, the examiner is still requested to provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not that the claimed disorders are otherwise etiologically related to service. In rendering the above requested opinions, the examiner must also consider the pertinent medical evidence of record, specifically the October 2017 statement from Dr. S.M and the May 2019 internet article regarding Agent Orange use in Okinawa. A full rationale is to be provided for all medical opinions. (Continued on the next page) 6. The AOJ must review the claims and ensure that the foregoing development and requested actions have been completed in full. If any development is incomplete, then appropriate and corrective actions must be taken. YVETTE R. WHITE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Berry, 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.