Citation Nr: 21074895 Decision Date: 12/16/21 Archive Date: 12/16/21 DOCKET NO. 18-39 862 DATE: December 16, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a kidney condition is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1966 to February 1968, with service at Camp Lejeune. The Veteran appeals an August 2017 rating decision by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). The Veteran contends that his kidney disease and kidney stones are due to exposure to water contaminates while stationed in Camp Lejeune. See August 2016 Veteran statement. The Veteran was treated for kidney and abdominal issues during service. See December 1967 service treatment records (STRs). The Veteran stated his kidney stones have been an ongoing problem ever since service and that his first kidney stone was in 1967. See August 2016 Veteran statement; April 2017 correspondence. The Veteran submitted articles noting a link between Camp Lejeune water contaminants and kidney issues. See January 2017 and August 2018 articles. A negative nexus opinion was rendered in August 2017. The opinion focused on the fact that the Veteran's current kidney condition was not a presumptive condition, that he separated from active service without any noted kidney issues, and that the Veteran has other conditions that contribute to his kidney disease. However, the opinion did not comment on the Veteran's STRs noting kidney and abdominal issues or the Veteran's competent statements of having ongoing kidney stones since service. It also does not appear that the Veteran was examined in person. Given the limited number of medical records available, an examination would clarify the current diagnosis and aid in determining the etiology of the Veteran's kidney condition. As such, remand is required for an examination and a new etiology opinion. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any outstanding VA and/or private treatment records relevant to treatment the Veteran received for his kidney condition that are not already of record. All obtained records should be associated with the evidentiary record. If any identified records are not obtainable (or none exist), the Veteran and his representative should be notified, and the record clearly documented. 2. Thereafter, schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the nature and etiology of his kidney condition. The evidentiary record, including a copy of this remand, must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. After the record review and examination of the Veteran, the examiner should identify all kidney conditions present. Then, for each identified kidney condition, the examiner is asked to respond to the following inquiry: Is it at least as likely as not that the Veteran's kidney condition was incurred in, or is otherwise related, to his time on active service, to include his conceded exposure to water contaminates at Camp Lejeune? The examiner is to consider the Veteran's in-service kidney and abdominal treatment and submitted articles noting a link between kidney issues and exposure to Camp Lejeune water contaminants. In rendering this opinion, the examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history. Such reports must be acknowledged and considered in formulating any opinion. If the examiner rejects the Veteran's reports, he or she must provide an explanation for such rejection. The examiner is not to improperly discount the Veteran's lay statements or mistakenly rely on an absence of medical evidence in the record to support his or her conclusions. A complete rationale for all opinions should be set forth and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. If an opinion cannot be provided without resorting to mere speculation, the examiner must provide a complete explanation for why an opinion cannot be rendered. In so doing, the examiner must explain whether the inability to provide a more definitive opinion is the result of a need for additional information, or that he or she has exhausted the limits of current medical knowledge in providing an answer to that particular question(s). 3. After the above development has been completed to the extent possible, readjudicate the claim. If any benefit sought remains denied, provide the Veteran and his representative with a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC), and return the case to the Board, if otherwise in order. DONNIE R. HACHEY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Zheng, 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.