Citation Nr: 21075637 Decision Date: 12/21/21 Archive Date: 12/21/21 DOCKET NO. 16-11 025 DATE: December 21, 2021 REMANDED The claim of entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had honorable active duty service with the United States Navy from January 1965 to January 1967, as well as approximately 24 years of National Guard service. The Veteran passed away in October 2012, and the appellant in this matter is his surviving spouse. The instant claim is on appeal from a March 2013 rating decision. In January 2019, the appellant testified before the undersigned in a videoconference hearing. A transcript of the proceedings has been associated with the record. The Board previously remanded this issue in April 2019 to conduct additional evidentiary development, specifically to attempt to obtain the Veteran's complete National Guard records. 1. The claim of entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is remanded. The Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, but remand is again necessary. Following the previous remand, the Regional Office conducted multiple attempts to obtain the Veteran's National Guard records. Unfortunately, the state National Guard reported that they did not possess these records. A formal finding of unavailability was included with the October 2021 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC). In this search, however, the Veteran's pay records from his 24 years of National Guard service were not sought from the Defense Finance Accounting Service (DFAS) or other relevant service. This narrow search should be conducted on remand in order to obtain the dates of the Veteran's periods of active duty for training and inactive duty for training with the National Guard. Furthermore, a review of the limited available service treatment records reflects abnormal echocardiogram findings during the Veteran's National Guard service. While there were no reports of asbestosis or respiratory symptoms noted in this period, the Veteran did undergo an exercise test in 1991 due to this abnormal echocardiogram. He also had a well-documented history of hypertension. The only medical opinion of record, unfortunately, only addresses asbestosis in relation to the Veteran's two-year period of active duty service but does not consider his subsequent extensive National Guard service. Accordingly, the Board finds it appropriate to obtain a medical opinion on the cause of the Veteran's death that addresses these findings. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the appropriate entity, to include DFAS or other provider, to request pay records and/or verification of the dates for each period of active duty for training and inactive duty for training for the National Guard, and then prepare and include in the claims file a summary of the dates of active duty, active duty for training and inactive duty for training. A retirement points summary will not suffice. If any requested records are not available, or the search for any such records otherwise yields negative results, that fact must clearly be documented in the claims file. Efforts to obtain these records must continue until it is determined that they do not exist or that further attempts to obtain them would be futile. The non-existence or unavailability of such records must be verified, and this should be documented for the record. Required notice must be provided to the appellant and her representative. 2. Once the aforementioned development is complete, obtain a medical opinion from an appropriate clinician or clinicians regarding the Veteran's cause of death. A complete copy of the claims file must be provided to the clinician, including a copy of this remand and, if possible, the verified dates of the Veteran's National Guard service as requested in Section 1. After a thorough review of the medical and lay evidence of record, the clinician(s) should opine as to the following: (a.) Is it at least as likely as not that the Veteran had a diagnosis of asbestosis or other respiratory disorder stemming from a period of active duty for training? Please address the Veteran and appellant's contentions that the Veteran had a diagnosis of asbestosis around the 1980's. (b.) Is it at least as likely as not that any disabilities or conditions noted during a period of active duty for training were a principle or contributory cause of the Veteran's death or materially hastened death? Please address the abnormal echocardiogram in August 1991. (c.) Is it at least as likely as not that any injuries noted during a period of inactive duty for training were a principle or contributory cause of the Veteran's death or materially hastened death? The examiner is advised that a contributory cause of death is one not related to the principal cause, but one that contributed substantially or materially; that it combined to cause death; that it aided or lent assistance to the production of death. It is not sufficient to show that it causally shared in producing death, but rather it must be shown that there was a causal connection. The examination report should specifically state that a review of the record was conducted. The clinician should provide a complete rationale for all opinions provided. If an opinion cannot be provided without to resorting to mere speculation, the clinician should identify all medical and lay evidence considered in this conclusion, fully explain why this is the case and identify what additional evidence (if any) would allow for a more definitive opinion. 3. Following completion of the foregoing, the AOJ should review the record and readjudicate the claim on appeal. If it remains denied, the AOJ should issue an appropriate supplemental SOC, afford the appellant and her representative an opportunity to respond, and return the case to the Board. B. MULLINS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board H. Fisher, 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.