Citation Nr: 21005581 Decision Date: 02/02/21 Archive Date: 02/02/21 DOCKET NO. 14-36 005 DATE: February 2, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for allergies, to include as due to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from August 1967 to March 1969, to include service in Vietnam from March 1968 to March 1969. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2013 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The case was most recently before the Board in April 2020, when it was remanded for additional development. The Board notes that the Veterans Law Judge who conducted the September 2015 hearing has retired and is no longer employed by the Board. The Veteran was informed that the Veterans Law Judge who conducted the September 2015 hearing was no longer employed by the Board and offered the opportunity for a new hearing in a November 2020 letter. The November 2020 letter indicated that if the Veteran did not respond to the letter within 30 days, the Board will assume that he did not want another hearing and proceed accordingly. The Veteran did not respond to this letter. Therefore, the Board may proceed with its decision. 1. Entitlement to service connection for allergies, to include as due to exposure to herbicide agents, is remanded. The Veteran contends that his allergies began in service when he was exposed to herbicide agents and a VA etiology opinion was obtained in June 2020 addressing that contention. However, in a September 2020 submission, the Veteran’s agent alleged that the Veteran’s allergic rhinitis was the result of eating military food, being exposed to barracks dust and being exposed to pollen and/or the weather environment in Vietnam. The Veteran’s representative also submitted an article about ventilation of Army barracks. The etiology opinion of record did not address such contentions. On remand, an addendum opinion addressing these newly raised contentions should be obtained. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Veteran should be given the opportunity to identify any outstanding private or VA treatment records relevant to the claim on appeal. After obtaining any necessary authorization from the Veteran, all outstanding records should be obtained, to include updated VA treatment records. For private treatment records, make at least two (2) attempts to obtain records from any identified sources. If any such records are unavailable, inform the Veteran and his representative and afford him an opportunity to submit any copies in their possession. For federal records, all reasonable attempts should be made to obtain such records. If any records cannot be obtained after reasonable efforts have been made, issue a formal determination that such records do not exist or that further efforts to obtain such records would be futile, which should be documented in the claims file. The Veteran must be notified of the attempts made and why further attempts would be futile, and allowed the opportunity to provide such records, as provided in 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(b)(2) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). 2. Following the receipt of outstanding records, then return the claims file, to include a copy of this remand, to the June 2020 VA examiner for an addendum opinion. If the examiner who drafted the June 2020 opinion is unavailable, the opinion should be rendered by another appropriate medical professional. The need for another examination is left to the discretion of the medical professional offering the addendum opinion. The examiner is asked to furnish an opinion with respect to the following question: Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s current allergies had their onset in service or is otherwise related to his active duty? The examiner should specifically address the Veteran’s contentions that his allergies are the result of his eating military food during service, being exposed to barracks dust and being exposed to pollen and the weather environment in Vietnam. The examiner should also specifically address the article submitted by the Veteran regarding the ventilation of army barracks. A rationale should be provided for all opinions offered. If it is not possible to provide a specific opinion regarding the above questions, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), a deficiency in the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training). The medical opinions must support the conclusions reached with an analysis that is adequate to consider and weigh against other evidence of record; medical opinions must contain not only clear conclusions with supporting data, but also a reasoned medical explanation connecting the two. If an opinion cannot be expressed without resort to speculation, ensure that the clinician so indicates and discusses why an opinion is not possible, to include whether there is additional evidence that could enable an opinion to be provided, or whether the inability to provide the opinion is based on the limits of medical knowledge. KRISTY L. ZADORA Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board B. Adeyemi, 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.