Citation Nr: 0809678 Decision Date: 03/24/08 Archive Date: 04/09/08 DOCKET NO. 03-06 634 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Houston, Texas THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for acute and subacute peripheral neuropathy. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Texas Veterans Commission WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Catherine Cykowski, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active duty service from August 1973 to June 1976. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2002 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Houston, Texas. The veteran testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans' Law Judge in February 2008. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND The duty to assist requires VA to provide the claimant with a medical examination or a medical opinion when such an examination or opinion is necessary to make a decision on a claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(d) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R § 3.159 (2007). The veteran claims entitlement to service connection for acute and subacute peripheral neuropathy. He asserts that peripheral neuropathy is related to chemical exposure he had in his service occupation as a corrosion control specialist. The veteran had a VA examination in May 2006. The examiner noted that the claims file was not available at the time of the examination and concluded that an opinion would be speculative without a review of the claims file. The examiner stated that additional documentation, including lay statements, to better establish a time of onset would be helpful. In June 2007, the examiner reviewed the claims file and provided an addendum opinion. The examiner opined that a connection between solvent exposure and neuropathy might be possible but stated that a relation to military service, "would be speculative at this point." In July 2007, the veteran submitted lay statements from his daughter and former wife. These statements described the veteran's history of complaints of foot pain and numbness. The veteran's former wife stated that the veteran complained of foot pain and numbness as early as 1976. In light of the examiner's comment that additional evidence, including lay statements, would be useful in rendering an opinion, the Board finds that a remand is necessary before this claim can be decided. On remand, the examiner is asked to review the entire claims file and to provide an addendum to the May 2006 and July 2007 examination reports regarding whether the currently diagnosed acute and subacute peripheral neuropathy is related service. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain an addendum to the June 2007 VA examination report from the VA examiner who performed the June 2007 examination. If the examiner who performed the June 2007 examination is unavailable, then a new examiner must be asked for the required opinion. The veteran's claims folder and a copy of this remand must be provided to the examiner. The examiner is asked to review the entire claims file and to provide an opinion regarding whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater likelihood) that peripheral neuropathy had its onset during service or is causally linked to an incident of service, including to paint exposure during service. The examiner should provide a detailed rationale for the opinion. The veteran should not be scheduled for another examination unless the examiner determines that a new examination is necessary to render the requested opinion. 2. Following the requested development, the veteran's claim should be readjudicated based upon all of the evidence of record. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the veteran and his representative should be provided with a supplemental statement of the case and should have an applicable opportunity to respond. The case should then be returned to the Board. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2007). _________________________________________________ V. L. JORDAN Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2007).