Citation Nr: 20031320 Decision Date: 05/05/20 Archive Date: 05/05/20 DOCKET NO. 18-17 254 DATE: May 5, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for residuals of prostate cancer, to include as due to exposure to asbestos is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from August 1971 to March 1974. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2016 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The Board notes that in his September 2017 Notice of Disagreement, the Veteran asserted that "some of the storerooms could have stored dangerous chemicals or Agent Orange." However, in his March 2018 appeal to the Board, the Veteran stated that he was only appealing regarding his claimed exposure to asbestos. As such, the Board will no address exposure to Agent Orange. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) at a March 2020 travel Board hearing. A transcript of that hearing has been associated with the claims file. Entitlement to service connection for residuals of prostate cancer, to include as due to exposure to asbestos, is remanded. The Veteran asserts that his prostate cancer is due to his claimed exposure to asbestos while stationed aboard the USS Intrepid. Specifically, the Veteran claims that he along with others, was chosen to remove floor tiling from the USS Intrepid during his last year aboard the ship due to its decommissioning. The Veteran has further submitted an article citing studies which claim there may be a causal relationship between asbestos exposure and prostate cancer. Based on the above, the Board finds that a remand is necessary to attempt to verify the Veteran’s claimed exposure to asbestos and for a VA medical opinion. See, McClendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Conduct appropriate development to verify any asbestos removal from the USS Intrepid in 1973 and/or 1974, to include flooring tiles. If possible, verify the Veteran’s involvement any asbestos removal. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any prostate cancer and residuals thereof. The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including claimed exposure to asbestos. The examiner must address the articles regarding asbestos exposure received by VA on March 14, 2020. The examiner should list and discuss all of the Veteran's in-service and post-service risk factors for developing prostate cancer. All opinions provided must be thoroughly explained, and a complete and detailed rationale for any conclusions reached should be provided (a bare conclusory statement will be deemed inadequate). The examiner is reminded that the term "as likely as not" does not mean "within the realm of possibility," but rather that the evidence is so evenly divided that, in the examiner's expert opinion, it is as medically sound to find in favor of the proposition as it is to find against it. It is not sufficient to base an opinion on a mere lack of documentation of complaints in the service or post-service treatment records. 3. After completing the requested actions, and any additional development deemed warranted, readjudicate the claim in light of all pertinent evidence and legal authority. If the benefit sought remains denied, furnish to the Veteran a Supplemental Statement of the Case and afford him the appropriate time period for response before the claims file is returned to the Board for further appellate consideration. C. TRUEBA Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Brian P. Keeley 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.