Citation Nr: 0814515 Decision Date: 05/02/08 Archive Date: 05/12/08 DOCKET NO. 04-38 174A ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, including as due to exposure to herbicidal agents. 2. Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease, status post myocardial infarction, including as due to exposure to herbicidal agents. 3. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension, including as due to exposure to herbicidal agents. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD H. Seesel, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active service from April 1968 until November 1970. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or Board) on appeal from a January 2004 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida. 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 veteran contends that service connection is warranted for each of these conditions as secondary to in-service exposure to herbicides. He also asserts service connection for coronary artery disease and hypertension on the basis that he developed those disorders due to his diabetes mellitus. During the January 2008 Board hearing, the veteran testified that he received treatment at Palmetto General Hospital and another private hospital in Broward, Florida. After the hearing, the veteran submitted a VA Form 21-4142, Authorization and Consent to Release Information, for Memorial West Hospital. Records from these private facilities are not associated with the claims file and there is no indication that the records had ever been requested. These records are clearly relevant and should be obtained. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(b). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO should contact the veteran and ask him to specify all medical care providers who treated him for diabetes mellitus, hypertension and coronary artery disease. The veteran should be specifically asked to complete an authorization for release of medical records for the treatment he received from Palmetto General Hospital and an updated authorization for Memorial West Hospital, if necessary. After securing the necessary release(s), the RO/AMC should obtain those records that have not been previously secured. To the extent there is an attempt to obtain records that is unsuccessful, the claims file should contain documentation of the attempts made. The veteran and her representative should also be informed of the negative results, and should be given opportunity to submit the sought-after records. 2. The RO/AMC should take such additional development action as it deems proper with respect to the claims, including the conduct of any other appropriate VA examinations, and follow any applicable regulations and directives implementing the provisions of the VCAA as to its notice and development. Following such development, the RO/AMC should review and readjudicate the claims. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.2 (If the findings on an examination report do not contain sufficient detail, it is incumbent upon the rating board to return the report as inadequate for evaluation purposes). When the development requested has been completed, the claims should again be reviewed by the RO on the basis of the additional evidence. If service connection for diabetes mellitus is granted, the RO must consider whether service connection for coronary artery disease and/or hypertension is warranted as secondary to that disease. If the benefits sought are not granted, the veteran and his representative should be furnished a Supplemental Statement of the Case, and be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if appropriate. The veteran need take no action until he is notified. The Board intimates no opinion, either factual or legal, as to the ultimate conclusion warranted in this case. 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). _________________________________________________ STEVEN D. REISS Acting 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).