Citation Nr: 21024834 Decision Date: 04/26/21 Archive Date: 04/26/21 DOCKET NO. 17-36 834 DATE: April 26, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for the cause of death of the Veteran. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from December 1945 to May 1947. He died in May 1975, and the appellant is his surviving spouse. The claim on appeal is from a March 2016 rating decision. In October 2019, the appellant’s representative presented argument at a Board hearing. In January 2020, the Board denied service connection for the cause of death of the Veteran. The Veteran appealed the Board’s denial to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a November 2020 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), the parties moved to vacate and remand the Board’s decision denying service connection for cause of death. In a December 2020 Order, the Court vacated the Board’s January 2020 decision and remanded the matter to the Board for further appellate review consistent with the Order. Service connection for the cause of death. This matter must be remanded for compliance with the Court’s December 2020 Order. The November 2020 JMR found that a remand to the Board was needed because the Board erred by failing to discuss and ensure a VA examination addressed a July 1951 Application for Outpatient Treatment in which the Veteran reported stomach issues, stating he did not have trouble until service for this condition. Additionally, remand to the Board was necessary because a formal finding of the unavailability of the Veteran’s outstanding service records was not provided. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds that a remand for a new VA medical opinion is warranted, such that the examiner may provide an opinion that addresses whether the Veteran’s claimed in-service stomach problems and later reported in 1951 are related to service and his subsequent metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach. Further, while evidence of record includes a letter by the RO stating that NPRC responded stating no other service treatment records (STRs) are available, the record contains no actual documentation of the development efforts (such as the actual, full response from NPRC) and no issuance of a formal finding of unavailable records. On remand, a formal finding of unavailable records should be provided. It should also be noted that the November 2020 JMR also called into question a June 1975 rating decision, characterizing it as “granting” the Veteran a 100 percent evaluation for metastatic carcinoma of the stomach. In reviewing the rating decision in question, the Board notes this grant was for pension purposes and does not pertain to the DIC/cause of death claim currently on appeal. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any outstanding VA treatment records, including service treatment records. Fully document all development efforts to obtain STRs, to include all negative responses received from NPRC, in the electronic claims file. If any set of records do not exist, or further attempts to obtain the records would be futile, notify the appellant and her representative in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (e), to include generating a formal finding of unavailability, if appropriate. 2. Afford the appellant a VA medical opinion by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of the diagnosed metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that the disorder had its onset during the Veteran’s service, or was otherwise causally related to any event or circumstance of his service? Consideration should be given to a June 1951 Application for Outpatient Treatment in which the Veteran reported experiencing stomach issues, stating he did not have trouble until service for this condition. A complete rationale for all opinions should be provided. RYAN T. KESSEL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Becton, 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.