Citation Nr: 0812490 Decision Date: 04/15/08 Archive Date: 05/01/08 DOCKET NO. 06-06 482 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) in Columbia, Missouri THE ISSUE Entitlement to payment or reimbursement of the cost of unauthorized medical service provided to the veteran by the Texas County Memorial Hospital on March 4, 2002 and March 18, 2002, to include imaging service fees. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Missouri Veterans Commission ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Lawrence W. Klute, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from November 1989 to May 1997. This case comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from the following decisions by the VAMC: (1) A decision dated August 7, 2002, which denied payment of a $3,023.90 bill from Texas County Memorial Hospital for services rendered on March 18, 2002; (2) A decision dated August 8, 2002, which denied payment of a $728.00 bill from Palmaris Imaging for services provided on March 18, 2002; (3) A decision dated September 16, 2002, which denied payment of a $530.85 bill from Texas County Memorial Hospital for services rendered on March 4, 2002; and (4) A decision dated January 27, 2003, which denied payment of an $83.00 bill from Palmaris Imaging for services provided on March 4, 2002. In a January 2003 decision on the veteran's request for reconsideration, the VAMC continued its denials of payment made in the above listed decisions. The appeal is REMANDED to the VAMC. VA will notify the veteran if further action is required on his part. REMAND Reasons for remand VCAA notice The Board's review of the file indicates that the veteran was provided no notice pursuant to the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA). The VCAA includes an enhanced duty on the part of VA to notify a claimant as to the information and evidence necessary to substantiate a claim for VA benefits. The VCAA also redefines the obligations of VA with respect to its statutory duty to assist claimants in the development of their claims. VA will also make reasonable efforts to help the claimant obtain evidence necessary to substantiate the claim, unless no reasonable possibility exists that such assistance would aid in substantiating the claim. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5103, 5103A (West 2002). A remand is needed in order to afford the veteran appropriate VCAA notice. Hearing clarification Review of the record also indicates that the veteran did not indicate on his substantive appeal (VA Form 9) whether or not he wanted to appear personally at a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge. A remand is needed in order to further notify the veteran of his right to, and options for, a Board hearing, and obtain his response. Additional evidence Evidence of record indicates that the veteran was issued a fee card. It also appears that the veteran received medical treatment at Texas County Memorial Hospital prior to the dates in question, and that these visits may have been authorized by VA. Thus, there may have been an ongoing relationship between the VAMC and the Texas County Memorial Hospital. Accordingly, a remand is needed to obtain information concerning treatment of the veteran from the Texas County Memorial Hospital since October 1, 1999, specifically records from the VAMC relating to payment therefor (and/or prior denials of payment). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the VAMC in Columbia, Missouri, for the following action: 1. The VAMC should send the veteran a VCAA notice letter. The veteran should be specifically requested for a release to obtain records from the Texas County Memorial Hospital. The VAMC should also notify the veteran of his right to a personal hearing with Veterans Law Judge, and his options for a hearing in Washington, D.C., or a travel Board or video conference hearing at the closest VA Regional Office. 2. The VAMC should obtain all records of payment and/or denial of payment with respect to treatment of the veteran at the Texas County Memorial Hospital since October 1, 1999. If complete records are not located at the VAMC, the Texas County Memorial Hospital should be contacted in order to obtain such information. All such materials obtained, if any, should be associated with the file. 3. After undertaking any additional development which it deems to be appropriate, the VAMC should then readjudicate the veteran's claims of entitlement to reimbursement or payment for unauthorized medical expenses incurred at Texas County Memorial Hospital on March 4 and March 18, 2002. If the benefit sought on appeal remain denied, in whole or in part, the VAMC should provide the veteran and his representative with a supplemental statement of the case and allow an appropriate period of time for response. The case should then be returned to the Board for further consideration, if otherwise in order. The veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. See 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 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). _________________________________________________ Barry F. Bohan 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).