Citation Nr: 21009952 Decision Date: 02/23/21 Archive Date: 02/23/21 DOCKET NO. 15-31 492 DATE: February 23, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for heart arrhythmia, to include as secondary to exposure to chemicals is remanded. Service connection for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), to include as secondary to chemical exposure is remanded. Service for kidney condition, to include as secondary to chemical exposure is remanded. Service connection for residuals of a hysterectomy, to include as secondary to chemical exposure is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1975 to August 1981, with additional periods of service in the Army National Guard, from June 1996 to August 2004, to include periods of active duty for training and inactive duty for training. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2013 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Wichita, Kansas. In February 2019, the Board remanded the case to the RO for further evidentiary development. The Board regrets further delay, but finds that additional development is necessary before a decision may be rendered on these issues on appeal. In a February 2019 Board remand, the Board instructed the RO to undertake “appropriate efforts to independently verify the Veteran’s claimed chemical exposure at Fort McClellan between July 1975 and September 1975”, and that a “list of the chemicals that the Veteran was exposed to, or may have been exposed to, should be compiled, if possible.” Further, the remand instructs that if “in-service chemical exposure cannot be verified or conceded, the RO should notify the Veteran and her attorney of this fact, explain the efforts taken to obtain this information, and describe any further action to be taken.” However, the evidence of record does not show that these specific developments have been undertaken, as instructed. A remand by the Board confers on the Veteran or other claimant, as a matter of law, the right to substantial compliance with the remand order. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Therefore, a remand is required for compliance with the February 2019 remand, and specifically, undertaking a verification of the Veteran’s claimed exposure to chemicals. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Undertake all appropriate efforts to independently verify the Veteran’s claimed exposure to chemicals at Fort McClellan, between July 1975 and September 1975. a. In doing so, compile a list of the chemicals that the Veteran was allegedly exposed to, or may have been exposed to, to the extent possible. b. All attempts to fulfill this development, as specified above, including the mandatory response to the request, must be documented in the claims file. c. If after making as many requests as are necessary to obtain the information, and in-service chemical exposure cannot be verified or conceded, issue a Formal Finding Memorandum to the Veteran, describing all efforts undertaken to verify this information, and associate a copy with the claims file. Then, afford the Veteran an opportunity to respond. d. Thereafter, undertake any collateral development, if necessary, such as, for example, affording the Veteran a VA examination. M. Tenner Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board V-N. Pratt 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.