Citation Nr: 21039830 Decision Date: 07/01/21 Archive Date: 07/01/21 DOCKET NO. 15-19 840 DATE: July 1, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for type II diabetes mellitus is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The appellant is a Veteran who served on active duty from August 1961 to February 1962 and from January 1963 to January 1967. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from rating decisions in October 2011 and November 2012 by the Atlanta, Georgia, Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In October 2018, the Veteran testified at a video conference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. The transcript is of record. The issues on appeal were remanded for additional development in March 2020 and March 2021. Although this case was previously remanded, the Board finds the evidence obtained subsequent to the March 2021 remand order is not in compliance with the remand directive and that no explanation was provided as to why a request to the Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) was either not possible or was not warranted. Nor was a Formal Finding issued outlining the steps taken to assist the Veteran with notice to the Veteran of VA's inability to verify the in-service herbicide agent exposure. A remand by the Board confers on a veteran or other claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand orders. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Consideration has been given to an email correspondence dated May 11, 2021, from a VA Agent Orange group address reiterated prior statements that the Department of Defense (DoD) had not identified any location on the island of Okinawa where Agent Orange was used. However, neither that correspondence nor the RO request to that email address are responsive to the Board's remand directive. There is no indication that the May 11, 2021, email correspondence considered the pertinent evidence provided by the Veteran in this case. There was also no specific evidence provided in support of the statement. There is no basis in applicable VA law requiring that DoD identify where Agent Orange was used for an award of direct service connection and VA's duty to assist the Veteran in substantiating his claim as to Agent Orange exposure was not met in the case. The October 2015 article provided by the Veteran indicates that documents released by DoD in September 2015 under the Freedom of Information Act revealed an Agent Orange dioxin in Okinawa. The article also noted that 100 barrels containing traces of Agent Orange ingredients had been unearthed on land that used to be part of Kadena Air Base. An adequate effort to verify the Veteran's claim must include a search by an appropriate entity with consideration of this information. Therefore, additional development is required prior to appellate review. As noted in the March 2021 remand, the Veteran contends, in essence, that his coronary artery disease, type II diabetes mellitus, and hypertension developed as a result of active service, specifically as secondary to herbicide agent (Agent Orange) exposure. He states that exposure to Agent Orange occurred during a period of service in Okinawa, Japan, at Kadena Air Base and White Beach. He also maintains that he was exposed to Agent Orange while performing security duties near aircraft that had flown in areas where herbicide agents were used. It was further noted that the March 2020 remand requested that VA take appropriate efforts to verify whether the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents. It was noted that in support of his claim the Veteran had provided a copy of an article from The Asia-Pacific Journal, FOIA Documents Reveal Agent Orange Dioxin, Toxic Dumps, Fish Kills on Okinawa Base. Two Veterans Win Compensation, Many More Denied. (Vol. 13, Iss. 40, No. 1, Oct.05,2015). The Board remand directives included that a copy of that article, a copy of correspondence dated in May 2014, and a copy of the October 2018 hearing transcript accompany the request for verification. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Attempt to verify the Veteran's asserted in-service exposure to herbicide agents. If a request is not sent to the Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC), an explanation must be provided as to such request is not possible or was not warranted. Any attempt to verify exposure sent to an appropriate entity, must include copies of his correspondence dated in May 2014, the October 2018 hearing transcript, the article from The Asia-Pacific Journal, FOIA Documents Reveal Agent Orange Dioxin, Toxic Dumps, Fisk Kills on Okinawa Base. Two Veterans Win Compensation, Many More Denied. (Vol.13, Iss. 40, No. 1, Oct. 05, 2015), and the January 2013 report titled INVESTIGATIONS INTO ALLEGATIONS OF HERBICIDE ORANGE ON OKINAWA, JAPAN. If more details are needed, contact the Veteran to request the information. If there is insufficient information to verify exposure to herbicide agents, issue a Formal Finding outlining the steps taken to assist the Veteran and notify the Veteran of VA's inability to verify the in-service herbicide agent exposure. (SIGNATURE NEXT PAGE) MICHAEL A. HERMAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Douglas 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.