Citation Nr: 22018662 Decision Date: 03/30/22 Archive Date: 03/30/22 DOCKET NO. 17-36 145 DATE: March 30, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for hypertension, to include as due to herbicide agent exposure, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 1969 to November 1970 with subsequent periods of National Guard service. In March 2019, the Board remanded the claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and denied the claims for service connection for hypertension and bilateral knee disorder. The Veteran appealed the portion of the March 2019 Board decision that denied service connection for hypertension to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In July 2020, the Court granted a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) and remanded the appeal to the Board to consider the Veteran's reasonably raised theory of entitlement to service connection for hypertension due to service in Vietnam. In February 2021, the Board denied the claim for service connection for hypertension and remanded the claim for service connection for a bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran appealed the portion of the February 2021 Board decision that denied service connection for hypertension to the Court. In January 2022, the Court granted a JMPR and remanded the appeal to the Board to address whether the Board had constructive possession of the National Academies of Science Update 2014 and if a VA examination is warranted to address whether the Veteran's hypertension is due to exposure to herbicides. A July 2009 Army National Guard Retirement Points History Statement documents the Veteran served with the Georgia Army National Guard from 1969 to 2008. Records from that service are missing from the claims file. The Veteran's DD 214 also documents he was transferred to the US Army Reserve, but the claims file does not contain records relating to this service. The Board finds remand is necessary to obtain these records. To date, the Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination or etiology medical opinion with respect to his service connection claim for hypertension. Therefore, the Board finds that remand is necessary to schedule the Veteran for a VA examination and to obtain a medical opinion before it can render an informed decision on the claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006) The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain records relating to the Veteran's National Guard and Army Reserve service, to include but not limited to the dates he served in the Army Reserve, verification of any periods of activation into federal service while in the National Guard, and any outstanding medical records from all periods of service. 2. After resolving the issue of any missing National Guard and/or Army Reserve records, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with a VA physician of appropriate expertise to assess the nature and etiology of his hypertension. The examiner must review the Veteran's entire claims file, to include a copy of this REMAND, and that review must be noted in the report. A complete history of symptoms must be elicited from the Veteran. All clinical findings should be reported in detail. Thereafter, the examiner must provide a fully-articulated medical opinion addressing the following: Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's hypertension was incurred in or caused by any in-service disease, event, or injury to include exposure to herbicide agents in Vietnam? The examiner must provide a complete rationale for any opinions offered, citing to the examiner's own expertise, medical principals, and/or evidence in the Veteran's file, when necessary, to support the conclusion reached. If the examiner determines that an opinion cannot be reached without resorting to speculation, the examiner must fully explain why that is so. J. NICHOLS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board P. McDaniels, 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.