Citation Nr: 21022034 Decision Date: 04/14/21 Archive Date: 04/14/21 DOCKET NO. 18-38 878 DATE: April 14, 2021 REMANDED The issue of service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from June 1969 to December 1970. He died in early 2017, and the appellant is the Veteran’s widow. Pursuant to a joint motion for partial remand (JMPR) filed by VA and the appellant, in November 2020 the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) vacated the Board of Veterans’ Appeals’ (Board) January 2020 decision and remanded it to the Board for compliance with its instructions. As outlined below, the matter is remanded to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for a medical opinion consistent with the parties’ JMPR. The issue of service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death is remanded. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. BACKGROUND FOR THE RO ADJUDICATOR: The matter is remanded to the AOJ to obtain a VA medical opinion addressing whether the Veteran’s melanoma (the cause of death listed on his death certificate) was directly related to active service. 2. REMAND DIRECTIVES: Obtain a VA medical opinion from an appropriately qualified PHYSICIAN to respond to the inquiries below. All relevant medical records must be made available to the examiner for review of pertinent documents. The report should specifically state that such a review was conducted. The examiner must provide a comprehensive explanation for all opinions provided. The examiner is requested to provide the following opinions: (a) Whether the Veteran’s metastatic melanoma was caused by in-service exposure to herbicides and/or sunlight; (b) Whether the Veteran’s metastatic melanoma was otherwise directly related to any injury, disease or event that occurred during active service. *THE EXAMINER IS ADVISED THAT THE VETERAN IS PRESUMED TO HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO HERBICIDES DURING ACTIVE SERVICE. In addition to reviewing the entire file, the examiner is requested to review the following: *Non-VA medical records from Middle Creek Family Practice. See “Medical Treatment Record – Non-Government Facility,” received May 6, 2017. *Veteran’s amended death certificate stating the underlying cause of death as “metastatic cancer,” but listing diabetes mellitus under “significant conditions contributing to death but not resulting in the underlying cause.” See “Death Certificate,” received February 13, 2018. *January 2018 VA medical opinion. See “C&P Exam,” received January 10, 2018. *May 2018 VA medical opinion. See “C&P Exam,” received May 24, 2018. *Statement by the appellant that she was informed by the Veteran’s doctors that Agent Orange caused his death. “Buddy / Lay Statement,” received January 11, 2019. *Hearing testimony where appellant stated the Veteran may have been exposed to “a great deal of sun” during his service in Vietnam and lost his hair when he returned to the United States. See “Hearing Transcript,” received November 4, 2019. *Letter from the Veteran’s primary care doctor (P. Collins, D.O.) stating the Veteran ultimately died from metastatic melanoma, but the Veteran’s wife reported he also had low blood sugars prior to his death. The physician concluded that “diabetes may have contributed to [the Veteran’s] death.” See “Medical Treatment Record – Non-Government Facility,” received December 20, 2019. *Internet-based article titled “Agent Orange affecting children and grandchildren of Vietnam Vets,” suggesting a link between Agent Orange exposure and cancer. See “Correspondence,” received December 20, 2019. Following the review and any additional development deemed necessary, readjudicate the claim. Should the claim not be granted in its entirety, issue a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) and forward the claim to the Board for adjudication. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims remanded by the Board or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) for additional development or other appropriate action be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 5109B, 7112. Vito A. Clementi Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board B. Hiaasen 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.