Citation Nr: 20044063 Decision Date: 06/30/20 Archive Date: 06/30/20 DOCKET NO. 15-02 250 DATE: June 30, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for residuals of prostate cancer is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1978 to January 1982, with additional service in the Reserve from August 1986 to January 2014. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2014 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In accordance with his request, the Veteran was scheduled for a Board hearing before a Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in April 2017; however, he failed to appear for it. He has not presented good cause for his absence or requested that such hearing be rescheduled. Therefore, his request for a Board hearing is considered withdrawn. 38C.F.R. §§20.702(d), 20.704(d). Entitlement to service connection for residuals of prostate cancer The Veteran contends that he developed prostate cancer as a result of exposure to jet fuels in service. While the Board regrets further delay, it finds a remand is necessary. The Veteran’s claim most recently was remanded in September 2019. In the September 2019 remand, the Board found that a remand was necessary because the VA opinion of record did not address the scholarly articles submitted by the Veteran that suggested a relationship between exposure to jet fuels and prostate cancer or explain why the examiner found such articles to be less persuasive than a National Institute of Health article she cited to. Accordingly, the Board directed the examiner to consider the scholarly articles in an addendum opinion, and if she did not find them persuasive, she was directed to explain why. Pursuant to the September 2019 remand, another opinion was obtained in January 2020. However, a review of the opinion shows that the examiner again did not address the articles submitted by the Veteran. Given this deficiency, there has not been substantial compliance with the Board’s remand directives and an addendum opinion is required. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998); see 38 C.F.R. § 4.2. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Return the Veteran’s claims file to the VA examiner who conducted the January 2020 VA examination and obtain an addendum medical opinion concerning the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s prostate cancer residuals. If the examiner who rendered the January 2020 opinion is unavailable, the opinion should be rendered by another appropriate medical professional. The examiner must review the entire claims file, to include a copy of this REMAND, in conjunction with authoring the opinion. The need for an additional examination of the Veteran is left to the discretion of the VA examiner. (A) The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s residuals of prostate cancer were caused by, or are otherwise related to, his exposure to jet fuel during his active duty and Reserve service, as opposed to when he was working as a civilian. In offering such opinion, the examiner should consider the scholarly articles submitted by the Veteran’s agent in June 2014 that address the effects of exposure to TCE in relation to prostate cancer. If he or she does not find such to be persuasive, he or she should explain why. (B) The examiner also is asked to opine whether the episodes of impotence the Veteran experienced in service were initial manifestations of prostate cancer. A complete rationale must be provided for all opinions expressed. The rationale must consider and discuss the pertinent evidence of record, to include the Veteran’s lay statements. C. CRAWFORD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board E. Mortimer, 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.