Citation Nr: 21030451 Decision Date: 05/18/21 Archive Date: 05/18/21 DOCKET NO. 17-14 920 DATE: May 18, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for lung cancer is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served in the U.S. Navy from February 1987 to September 1998. The Veteran also served in the U.S. Navy Reserve from September 1998 to March 2002. The Veteran died in March 2019. The appellant is the surviving spouse and substitute claimant in this appeal. The appellant appeals the denial of service connection for lung cancer and entitlement to TDIU. The appellant argues that the Veteran's lung cancer was the result of his exposure to ionizing radiation to which he was exposed during his time in the Navy. The Veteran served as a Russian linguist and arms control inspector during his time in the Navy. He served in the On-Site Inspection Agency from April 1991 to September 1995 and he claims that he was exposed to radiation as part of his duties inspecting nuclear weapons. In the September 2020 Court memorandum decision, it was established that the Veteran's service as an arms control inspector included personal participation in on-site inspections concerning nuclear weapons. In June 2015, the Veteran's private oncologist, Dr. R opined that it was possible that the environmental exposure the Veteran was subject to during his military service may have contributed towards his diagnosis of lung cancer. The opinion was based upon the Veteran's reports that he was exposed to some degree of radiation during his military service while he was working at various nuclear weapon testing sites in the Soviet Union and Nevada. A review of the record shows that the RO has not made a sufficient attempt to verify dose estimates for all the years the Veteran participated in nuclear inspections. While the record contains a July 2016 dosimetry report regarding potential exposure to ionizing radiation for the period from May 1994 to May 1995, there is no showing that a report was obtained for the years between 1991 and1994. In light of the directives from the Court and the evidence of record, the Board finds that a remand is warranted to attempt to verify the Veteran's assertions of radiation exposure. Regarding the claim for individual unemployability, the Board finds that the issue of entitlement to TDIU is inextricably intertwined with the remanded claim and must also be remanded. See Parker v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 116 (1994); Harris v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Forward the Veteran's personnel records and other pertinent documents, along with a summary of the claimed circumstances of the Veteran's ionizing radiation exposure (exposure to radiation as part of duties inspecting nuclear weapons), to the VA Under Secretary for Health for a radiation dose estimate, in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.311 (a)(2)(iii). 2. If it is determined that the Veteran was exposed to radiation during service, forward the case to the VA Under Secretary for Benefits to obtain an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not that any exposure to ionizing radiation caused or contributed to his development of lung cancer taking into consideration the factors listed under 38 C.F.R. § 3.311(e). 3. After all development has been completed, re-adjudicate the claims. If the benefit sought on appeal is not granted to the fullest extent, issue the appellant a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond before the case is returned to the Board for further appellate review. Saudiee Brown Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T.S. Willie 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.