Citation Nr: 21012516
Decision Date: 03/04/21	Archive Date: 03/04/21

DOCKET NO. 14-22 130
DATE: March 4, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for asthma is remanded.

REASONS ‘S FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from October 1970 to October 1974. There has not been substantial compliance with the Board’s March 2020 remand directives and the claim must be remanded again. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998).

Entitlement to service connection for asthma is remanded.

The claim must be remanded again because the December 2020 VA examination is inadequate. In the negative opinion, the VA examiner cited to a study stating “[p]reliminary comparison of medical records of Air Force personnel occupationally exposed to JP-8 with records of unexposed (control) personnel showed that numbers of medical visits related to respiratory problems were not markedly different between the exposed and unexposed groups.” The Board finds that this study only supports the Veteran’s contention that he did not seek medical attention following his exposure to JP-8 fuel. No other medical research was cited by the examiner. 

Additionally, the examiner appears to impermissibly rely on the lack of treatment records as a basis for the negative opinion. Therefore, on remand a new VA examination is necessary.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

After the completion of the above, schedule the Veteran for an appropriate examination to determine the current nature and likely etiology of his asthma. The entire record, including this remand, must be provided to the examiner for review. Based on the examination and review of the record, the examiner should provide an opinion to the following:

Is it at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s asthma is related to his service, to include as due to exposure to jet fuel fumes?

In answering this question, the examiner should consider, and discuss as necessary the Veteran’s lay statements of continuing symptomatology since service.

The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to provide evidence of symptomatology readily apparent to him, regardless of whether the symptoms are noted in the service medical records or on the date of examination. The examiner may NOT rely on the absence of a medical record or evidence of medical treatment as the sole rationale for any negative medical nexus opinion.

A complete rationale must be provided for all opinions, citing to supporting factual data and medical literature, as appropriate. If the examiner cannot provide an opinion without resort to speculation, 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) and note what, if any, additional evidence would permit such an opinion to be made.

 

 

M.E. Larkin

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	M. G. Perkins, 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.