Citation Nr: 21020746
Decision Date: 04/08/21	Archive Date: 04/08/21

DOCKET NO. 12-33 823
DATE: April 8, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is remanded.

Entitlement to service connection for a heart disability is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from December 1965 to December 1985.

1. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is remanded.

The Board cannot make a fully-informed decision on the issue of service connection for hypertension because no VA examiner has opined whether the Veteran’s hypertension is directly related to his active service, to include presumed

 

exposure to herbicide agents. The medical opinions obtained in May 2019 and June 2020 indicate that the Veteran’s hypertension is less likely than not related to his active service. However, the rationales explain only that there is not enough evidence linking hypertension to herbicide exposure to warrant a presumption of nexus between the two. This does not adequately answer the question of whether this Veteran’s hypertension is in fact related to his active service. Remand is necessary for an addendum opinion. 

2. Entitlement to service connection for a heart disability is remanded.

Because a decision on the remanded issue of entitlement to service connection for hypertension could significantly impact a decision on the issue of service connection for a heart disability, the issues are inextricably intertwined.  A remand of the claim is required.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether the Veteran’s hypertension is at least as likely as not related to his service, including (but not limited to) his presumed exposure to herbicide agents. The examiner must specifically address the likelihood for this particular Veteran. 

2. After the above development, and any additionally indicated development, has been completed, readjudicate the issues on appeal, including the inextricably intertwined issue of service connection for a heart

 

disability.  If the benefit sought is not granted to the Veteran’s satisfaction, send the Veteran and his representative a Supplemental Statement of the Case and provide an opportunity to respond.  If necessary, return the case to the Board for further appellate review.

 

 

H. N. SCHWARTZ

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	A. Creegan

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.