Citation Nr: 21002009 Decision Date: 01/12/21 Archive Date: 01/12/21 DOCKET NO. 20-02 890 DATE: January 12, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bladder cancer is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1961 to June 1965. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a December 2017 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional office (RO). In September 2020, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans’ Law Judge. A copy of the transcript has been associated with the records. Entitlement to service connection for a bladder disability, to include bladder cancer, is remanded. The Veteran’s post-service treatment records show that the Veteran is diagnosed with bladder cancer. The Veteran’s military personnel records and lay statements, to include his September 2020 testimony, also indicate that he served as a flight mechanic aboard the USS Franklin Delano Roosevelt and that he was exposed to several aviation fuels and other chemicals. Indeed, a June 1963 service treatment record shows that he was seen for treatment of a chemical burn on his hands and arms. The Veteran contends that it is this exposure to aviation fuel and chemicals that caused his current bladder cancer. Two private opinions weigh in favor of the claim. An April 2017 private opinion stated that “on a more probable benign basis, the patient’s bladder tumors are related to his exposure to radiation fuel and chemicals.” A July 2017 private opinion stated that the Veteran’s bladder cancer was due to “exposure to aviation fuel and chemical during military career.” Furthermore, in February 2020 correspondence, the Veteran submitted medical articles purporting to show a link between aviation fuels and the development of cancers. The Board is unable to grant service connection for bladder cancer based upon the April 2017 and July 2017 private opinions as they are conclusory and fail to include any rationale for the opinions contained therein. The Board is also unable to grant service connection based upon the February 2020 correspondence as it is general in nature and not specific to the Veteran and his particular circumstances. Nevertheless, the Veteran has not yet had a VA examination to determine whether his bladder disability is directly related to his military service, to include any exposure to aviation fuels and chemicals. Accordingly, a remand is required to obtain a VA examination and opinion addressing the etiology of the Veteran’s disability. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Undertake appropriate efforts to obtain any relevant outstanding VA or private medical records and associate them with the claims file. 2. Thereafter, afford the Veteran a VA examination with an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of his bladder cancer. The claims file, including a copy of this remand, must be provided to the examiner, who must note his or her review of the file. The examiner must obtain a detailed clinical history from the Veteran. All pertinent pathology found on examination must be noted in the report of the evaluation. All necessary testing must be performed. The examiner must provide an opinion as to the following: Whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran’s bladder cancer began in service, within a year of service separation, or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s active service, to include any exposure to aviation fuels and other chemicals. (Continued on the next page)   The VA examiner must specifically address the April 2017 private opinion that “on a more probable benign basis, the patient’s bladder tumors are related to his exposure to radiation fuel and chemicals,” the July 2017 private opinion that Veteran’s bladder cancer was due to “exposure to aviation fuel and chemical during military career,” and the February 2020 medical articles purporting to show a link between aviation fuels and the development of cancers. A complete rationale must be given for all opinions and conclusions expressed. LESLEY A. REIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Finelli, 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.