Citation Nr: 21007084 Decision Date: 02/08/21 Archive Date: 02/08/21 DOCKET NO. 05-04 694 DATE: February 8, 2021 REMANDED The claim of entitlement to service connection for a blood disorder, claimed as hypogammaglobulinemia, common variable immune deficiency (CVID), undifferentiated connective tissue disease, lupus, and bone marrow suppression is remanded.  REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1978 to August 1991. This case is on appeal from a May 2003 rating decision. The above issue was previously before the Board in October 2009, October 2012, June 2013, April 2014, November 2016, and May 2018. The Veteran testified regarding this issue during Board hearings conducted in June 2009 and November 2015 by two of the undersigned Veterans Law Judges. As detailed in the Board’s November 2016 decision, the Veteran waived participation in a third Board hearing. The Board is issuing a separate decision on a claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability (TDIU). That decision is being issued concurrently with the instant decision. The claim of entitlement to service connection for a blood disorder, claimed as hypogammaglobulinemia, CVID, undifferentiated connective tissue disease, lupus, and bone marrow suppression is remanded. The Board last remanded the issue in relevant part to obtain development on radiation exposure under 38 C.F.R. § 3.311. Upon remand, the RO obtained a dosimetry estimate, and then sent all relevant information to Compensation Service for an opinion, as consistent with § 3.311. In September 2020, Compensation Service responded that an opinion could not be provided because the RO did not “obtain[] relevant information from the Veteran, such as Radiation Risk Activities and smoking/family history, that is required to prepare an adequate medical opinion.” Based on this response, the RO sent the Veteran a letter in October 2020 asking him to provide the information identified by Compensation Service. He responded in November 2020. The RO then issued a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) in December 2020 stating that the Veteran had not responded to its October 2020 request for information. Because the information requested by Compensation Service was provided by the Veteran in November 2020, the RO’s December 2020 SSOC was issued prematurely. As a practical matter, it may be that the Veteran’s November 2020 response had not yet been uploaded into his electronic claims file by the time of the December 2020 SSOC. Nonetheless, as the information is now available, the case must be returned to Compensation Service for an opinion pursuant to § 3.311(c). Because such action was not taken, there has not been substantial compliance with the Board’s previous remand directives. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Another remand is warranted. Relatedly, the Board directed the RO to obtain all outstanding VA treatment records, including, but not limited to all non-VA reports received through VA’s Choice program. The request was to include records that were “scanned in” to his VA electronic health record. The Board explained that this should have included records from Dr. Redner at the Hillman Cancer Center as identified in a February 2017 VA Hematology report. Upon remand, additional VA medical records were obtained. The “scanned in” medical records identified in the remand do not appear to be amongst those records obtained. Hence, there was also not substantial compliance with this Board remand directive. See Stegall, 11 Vet. App. at 271. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain all outstanding VA treatment records, including, but not limited to all non-VA reports received through VA’s Choice program. The request should include records that have been “scanned in” to the VA electronic health record, such as records from Dr. Redner at the Hillman Cancer Center. 2. Develop the Veteran’s claim of entitlement to service connection for a blood disorder under the provisions of 38C.F.R. §3.311 for claims based on exposure to ionizing radiation, to include obtaining a review by Compensation Service with the information provided in November 2020. APRIL MADDOX Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals A. JAEGER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals RYAN T. KESSEL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Bosely, 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.