Citation Nr: 21010648 Decision Date: 02/25/21 Archive Date: 02/25/21 DOCKET NO. 18-17 967 DATE: February 25, 2021 ORDER Service connection for lung cancer residuals, to include removal of right lung, is granted. Service connection for a heart disorder is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The competent and probative evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether lung cancer residuals had their onset in or are otherwise related to the Veteran’s period of active service. 2. The competent and probative evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether a heart disorder had its onset in or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s period of active service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for lung cancer residuals have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 2. The criteria for service connection for a heart disorder have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from March 1977 to March 1981. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2016 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In October 2020, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the virtual file. Service Connection Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). As a general matter, establishing service connection requires competent evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a nexus between the in-service disease or injury and the present disability. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The Veteran is competent to report symptoms and experiences observable by his senses. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(a). In relevant part, 38 U.S.C. § 1154(a) requires that VA give “due consideration” to “all pertinent medical and lay evidence” in evaluating a claim for disability benefits. Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 57-58 (1990). 1. Service connection for lung cancer residuals. 2. Service connection for a heart disorder. The Veteran contends that lung cancer and his heart disorder are the result of his military occupational specialty (MOS) as a chemical operations specialist. Specifically, the Veteran stated that while stationed in Germany and Aberdeen, Maryland, he was routinely exposed to radiation, toxic waste (including burn pits), various lethal gases, and numerous hazardous chemicals. The Veteran also stated that while stationed in Aberdeen, he dumped chemical waste and toxins in large open-air burn pits, then used contaminated jet fuel and a lighter to ignite the chemical waste without wearing protective gear. See October 2020, Hearing transcript; March 2017, Affidavit; July 2016, VA Form 21-4138. After review of the record, the Board finds the criteria for service connection for lung cancer residuals and a heart disorder have been met. The record contains competent diagnoses of atrial fibrillation, cardiac syncope, bradycardia with pauses, and lung carcinoma status post right pneumonectomy. See April 2016, VA treatment record. The Board, accordingly, finds competent evidence of a current disorder. See VA treatment records dated April 2015, October 2019, and November 2019. Military personnel records indicate the Veteran’s MOS as a chemical operations specialist in Germany from November 1977 to November 1978 and a decontamination equipment operator/section chief of a technical escort unit in Aberdeen, Maryland from November 1978 to March 1981. The Veteran’s duties in Aberdeen included acting as a chemical section chief on all disposal operations involving toxic and contaminated materials, supervising procurement of vehicles and equipment to be utilized on disposal and escort operations. See March 2016, DD-214; Military personnel records dated December 1980 and February 1981; April 1980, Service treatment record. In October 2019, Dr. Rudolph Mueller, the Veteran’s VA treating physician since May 2018, indicated the Veteran has coronary artery disease and a history of lung cancer from 2002. Dr. Mueller reviewed the Veteran’s active duty service records, medical history, pathology reports from 2002, and all pertinent VA medical evidence from April 2013 to October 2019. He opined it is more likely than not that lung cancer is the result of the Veteran’s active duty service. Dr. Mueller reasoned the Veteran developed lung cancer at the relatively young age of 44 and only had a 13 pack per year smoking history; thus, without some type of military service exposure, the Veteran probably would not have contracted squamous cell carcinoma at age 44. October 2019, VA treatment record. In November 2019, Dr. Hiroko Beck, the Veteran’s VA treating physician since August 2015, indicated the Veteran has current diagnoses of atrial fibrillation, syncope, and bradycardia with pauses. Dr. Beck reviewed the Veteran’s VA medical history since August 2015 and opined it is at least as likely as not that in-service exposure contributed to and/or exacerbated the Veteran’s cardiac diagnoses. November 2019, VA treatment record. The Board accords high probative weight to Drs. Mueller and Beck’s etiology opinions because they have been actively treating the Veteran since May 2018 and May 2015, respectively, reviewed all relevant service and medical records, and considered the Veteran’s lay statements of in-service exposure. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 304 (2008). A buddy statement from D.B. indicates he served with the Veteran at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Aberdeen, Maryland from 1979 to 1981. D.B. stated he and the Veteran worked as Technical Escort Units and were responsible for escorting the movement of biological and chemical agents from lab to lab, cleaning toxic chemical and biological agent spills on base and the surrounding areas, and disposal of chemical and biological agents in open-air burn pits. He stated they were only required to wear the rubber suits when cleaning up lab accidents but did not have to wear them while destroying toxic waste in burn pits. Their orders included dumping unmarked and leaking drums of chemical and biological agents by picking up the rusting drums with their bare hands and crawling on their hands and knees to comb the area for broken pieces of barrels and other toxic debris. They also inhaled smoke and had dust residue land on their skin from the burn pits. See March 2017, Affidavit. In light of the foregoing, the Board finds that the weight of the competent and probative evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran’s current lung cancer residuals and heart disorder had their onset during or are otherwise related to active service. The Board finds statements of the Veteran and D.B. concerning in-service chemical exposure in Germany and Aberdeen, Maryland, to be competent and credible, and therefore, accords high probative weight to same. Jandreau, 492 F.3d at 1377; see October 2020, Hearing transcript; March 2017, Affidavits. Resolving all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds service connection for lung cancer residuals and a heart disorder is warranted. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Gilbert, 1 Vet. App. at 57-58. JAMES L. MARCH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Straughn, 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.