Citation Nr: 21073517 Decision Date: 12/08/21 Archive Date: 12/08/21 DOCKET NO. 15-09 326 DATE: December 8, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for colorectal cancer, to include as due to herbicide exposure, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from November 1967 to October 1969, to include service in the Republic of Vietnam. This appeal stems from a June 2013 rating decision. In April 2019, the Board denied the claim, which the Veteran timely appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In an October 2020 Memorandum Decision, the Court set aside the Board's denial of the claim and remanded it for further development. Pursuant to the Memorandum Decision, the Board remanded the claim in June 2021. Specifically, the Board asked that the Regional Office (RO) provide the Veteran with an opportunity to identify any outstanding private medical records and to resubmit copies of medical literature previously submitted but no longer available on the provided website addresses. In a June 2021 letter, the RO invited the Veteran to submit this evidence; however, to-date he failed to do so. The Board therefore finds that there was substantial compliance with this part of the June 2021 remand directives. Nevertheless, there was no substantial compliance of the October 2021 medical opinion. The medical opinion is inadequate as it failed to address specific evidence as requested by the Board. Specifically, the Board asked the examiner to address the following: 1) the April 2012 and May 2014 statements that the Veteran has no family history of colon cancer; 2) the January 2015 private medical opinion; 3) the February 2015 statement; 4) any articles submitted by the Veteran regarding the link between herbicide exposure and colon cancer; and 5) the March 2019 VA medical opinion. The October 2021 opinion addressed item number one above indicating that no family history of colon cancer does not make someone immune to it, and as such, it was not persuasive evidence that herbicide agents caused colon cancer. In this regard, the examiner indicated that the diagnosed colon cancer had nothing to do with herbicide agents. In support, the examiner cited to The National Academic Press: "Veterans and agent orange: update 2010." The examiner did not address the January 2015 private medical opinion, February 2015 statement, or the March 2019 medical opinion. The examiner also did not explain how the medical literature supported the conclusion that the Veteran's colon cancer was not related to herbicide agents. Accordingly, obtaining an addendum medical opinion is necessary prior to analyzing the merits of this claim. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain an addendum medical opinion from an appropriate VA examiner regarding the likely etiology of the Veteran's colon cancer. The claims file and a copy of this remand will be made available to the examiner, who will acknowledge receipt and review of these materials. The need for another examination is left to the discretion of the medical professional offering the addendum opinion. After a review of the record, the examiner is asked to respond to the following: Provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or higher) that colon cancer had its onset during service or is otherwise etiologically related to service, to include exposure to herbicide agents in Vietnam. In doing so, please address the following: 1) the January 2015 private medical opinion; 2) the February 2015 statement; 3) the March 2019 VA medical opinion. A complete rationale should be provided for all opinions. The rationale cannot rely on the fact that colon cancer is not noted in the "Limited Evidence of No Association" category in the 2010 Agent Orange Update." Rather, explain with complete rationale why colon cancer is or is not related to exposure to herbicide agents. 2. Thereafter, readjudicate the remanded claim. L. CHU Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Yaffe, 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.