Citation Nr: 22018569
Decision Date: 03/29/22	Archive Date: 03/29/22

DOCKET NO. 16-32 593
DATE: March 29, 2022

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for renal cell carcinoma is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran passed away in June 2015, while his claim was pending.  The appellant is the substitute claimant.  

This matter was remanded by the Board in April 2020 and November 2021.

Unfortunately, there has not been substantial compliance with the Board's previous remand directives.  Another remand is required.  Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998).

In the November 2021 remand, the Board identified the the Veteran's self-report of kidney disease in service as found in a March 19, 1968, X-Ray Container and Dental Patient History form, question 6(h), signed by the Veteran.  The Board directed that the examiner providing an addendum opinion must consider and address that record.  

The December 2021 medical opinion copied and pasted part of the Board's November 2021 remand, and stated the remand as well as the claims file were reviewed.  However, in rendering his opinion, the examiner generally mentioned the Veteran's service treatment records, but did not address the March 1968 service treatment record.  Accordingly, a remand is required to obtain an addendum opinion which addresses the Veteran's in-service report of kidney disease.

On March 16, 2022, VA received from the appellant's representative an appellate brief which contained hyperlinks to content that is not otherwise part of the record on appeal.  That content was not accessed nor considered as part of the record before the Board.  See Bowey v. West, 11 Vet. App. 106, 108-09 (1998) (holding that the mere reference to non VA documents is insufficient to incorporate them into the record).  As a remand is otherwise required, the appellant may submit any further evidence or argument she wishes VA to consider.

The matter is REMANDED for the following action:

1. Afford the appellant and her representative the opportunity to submit any further evidence or argument, to include the articles referenced in the March 2022 appellate brief, that they wish VA to consider.

2. Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether the Veteran's presumed renal cell carcinoma was at least as likely as not related to his active duty service.

The examiner must address the March 19, 1968, X-Ray Container and Dental Patient History form associated with the service treatment records, on which the Veteran responded to question 6(h) that he had been treated for kidney disease.

3. 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 appellant's satisfaction, send the appellant and her 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.

 

 

David Gratz

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	S. M. Cooney, 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.