Citation Nr: 21026370 Decision Date: 04/30/21 Archive Date: 04/30/21 DOCKET NO. 18-07 951 DATE: April 30, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection on an accrued benefits basis for a respiratory condition, to include asthma, excessive coughing, and/or lung disease, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from March 1946 to July 1966. This matter was last before the Board in March 2020, whereupon it was remanded to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for further development of the record. While the case was before the AOJ in appellate status, in April 2020 the Veteran passed away. The Appellant is the Veteran’s surviving spouse, and she filed her request for substitution in November 2020, which was granted by the AOJ. The AOJ continued the denial of the claim in an April 2021 supplemental statement of the case, and then returned the matter to the Board for its adjudication. In view of the facts found, and to provide broader consideration on appeal, the Board has recharacterized the claim of entitlement to service connection for asthma/excessive coughing/lung disease as one for a respiratory condition, to include asthma, excessive coughing, and/or lung disease. The Board in its prior remand instructed the AOJ to secure an addendum opinion from a qualified VA examiner in order to address the query of whether the Veteran’s asthma/excessive coughing/lung disease was attributable to service. Specifically, the Board directed that the chosen examiner was to opine as to whether the respiratory condition was attributable to the Veteran’s exposure to environmental hazards in service, to include conceded exposure to asbestos while in service. In an April 2020 addendum opinion, a VA examiner opined that it was less likely than not that any diagnosed respiratory condition was incurred in or otherwise attributable to service. In support thereof, the examiner highlighted the lack of an in-service diagnosis of a respiratory condition and noted that the Veteran was found to have normal lungs on his separation examination. The examiner did acknowledge the Veteran’s in-service complaints of and treatment for symptoms of a respiratory condition but found that these were all accounted for by the documented upper respiratory infections that he contracted during service. The examiner did not discuss the Veteran’s conceded exposure to asbestos in service or exposure to oil, fuel, and smoke, and did not address the Veteran’s contention that his respiratory condition was attributable to this exposure. This opinion is deficient as the examiner failed to address all of the queries set forth by the Board in its March 2020 remand instructions. The examiner pointedly did not opine as to whether the Veteran’s respiratory condition was attributable to his exposure to environmental hazards in service, to include conceded exposure to asbestos in service. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Remand is necessary in order to secure a further addendum opinion response to the Board’s prior remand instructions, which are copied in large part below. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Provide the claims file to the medical professional who issued the April 2020 addendum opinion, or to another qualified medical professional if that individual is not available, in order to secure an addendum opinion regarding the likely etiology of the claimed respiratory condition. The entire claims file, to include a complete copy of this REMAND, must be made available to the individual designated to examine the Veteran, and that individual must note review of the file prior to setting forth any etiology opinions.   Once again, the examiner is asked to identify all current respiratory and lung disabilities after reviewing the record. For each disability identified, the examiner should provide an opinion, with supporting rationale, as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., a 50 percent or greater probability) that each identified disability was incurred during the Veteran’s active service (as evidenced by multiple notations of a chronic cough), or is otherwise causally related to his active service or any incident therein (to include exposure to environmental hazards such as asbestos). In providing this opinion, the examiner should consider the relevant evidence of record, to include the Veteran’s service treatment record, his reports of a chronic cough since service separation, and the RO’s concession of in-service asbestos exposure. The examiner must provide any and all opinions as to etiology in the form of a probability and must provide a complete rationale for any opinion expressed. 2. After the above development, and any additionally indicated development, has been completed, readjudicate the issue on appeal. If the benefit sought is not granted to the Veteran’s satisfaction, send the Veteran and his representative a Supplemental Statement of the Case and provide an opportunity to respond. If necessary, return the case to the Board for further appellate review. R.R. WATKINS Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Christopher M. Collins, 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.