Citation Nr: 21024552 Decision Date: 04/23/21 Archive Date: 04/23/21 DOCKET NO. 12-24 452 DATE: April 23, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for ischemic heart disease (IHD) is remanded. Service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II (diabetes), is remanded. Service connection for peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served active duty from August 1948 to February 1955. In December 2012, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. The transcript is associated with the record. 1. Service connection for IHD 2. Service connection for diabetes 3. Service connection for peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities VA is under a heightened obligation to assist the Veteran in the development of his claim, as the Veteran’s personnel records are presumed to have been lost in a 1973 fire at the NPRC facility. See Cromer v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 215, 217-18 (2005). The Veteran contends VA has not considered his exposure to other herbicides, pesticides, chemicals, contaminated ground water, defoliants, indigenous animals, indigenous people, dead bodies, fuel fumes, and solvents related to his service in Guam from 1948-1950, at the Dugway Proving Grounds (DPG) from 1950-1951, and in Korea from 1951-1953. See February 2021 statement. It appears attempts to verify the Veteran’s in-service exposures has been limited to Agent Orange or other tactical herbicides. See May 2016 DPRIS response. The RO should assist the Veteran in attempting to verify his other reported in-service exposures. If a reported exposure is verified, the RO should obtain an opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether any of the Veteran’s claimed disabilities are at least as likely as not related to the verified in-service exposure. Additionally, the Board requests verification the author of the February 2021 VA opinion reviewed and considered the December 2012 private opinion from Dr. J.L.G. and the March 2014 VA medical opinion in forming her opinion. This acknowledgement was specifically requested in the January 2021 Board remand. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Attempt to verify the Veteran’s reported in-service exposure to non-tactical herbicides, pesticides, chemicals, contaminated ground water, defoliants, indigenous animals, indigenous people, dead bodies, fuel fumes, and solvents related to his service in Guam from 1948-1950, at the Dugway Proving Grounds (DPG) from 1950-1951, and in Korea from 1951-1953. Verification should include attempting to obtain unit histories for the 55th Military Police Company and that unit’s location in 1949, 1950, and 1953. It is noted a May 2016 DPRIS response found unit histories for 1948, 1951, or 1952 were not able to be obtained. Use the details the Veteran already provided regarding the nature, time, and location of his in-service exposures, to include February 2012, June 2013, April 2014, August 2016, May 2018, November 2020, and February 2021 statements. If more details are needed, contact the Veteran to request the information. All verification attempts and responses should be documented in the claims file. 2. If a reported exposure is verified, obtain an opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether the Veteran’s (a) IHD, (b) diabetes, or (c) peripheral neuropathy is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) related to the verified in-service exposure. 3. Obtain verification from the author of the February 2021 VA opinion as to whether she reviewed and considered the December 2012 private opinion from Dr. J.L.G. and the March 2014 VA medical opinion in forming her opinion. See January 2021 Board remand. She is asked to state whether the evidence changes her opinion and provide supporting rationale. KELLI A. KORDICH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Winkler, 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.