Citation Nr: 1012124 Decision Date: 03/31/10 Archive Date: 04/07/10 DOCKET NO. 04-01 959 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Winston- Salem, North Carolina THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for bronchitis. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD E. D. Anderson, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from May 1998 to March 2000. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2002 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. In June 2007, the Board remanded this matter to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC) in Washington, D.C. to schedule the Veteran for a VA examination. The action specified in the June 2007 Remand completed, the matter has been properly returned to the Board for appellate consideration. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 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 In the June 2007 Remand, the Board ordered the RO to schedule a VA examination for the Veteran to determine whether her bronchitis had onset in service or was caused or aggravated by her active service. The Veteran was scheduled for VA examinations on August 1, 2007, August 15, 2007, and August 17, 2007, but failed to appear for any of the examinations. The RO mailed notice of the examinations to two separate addresses on file, but these notices were returned as undeliverable and the RO was unable to obtain a new address from the United States Postal Service. Under normal situations, the Board would find that the duty to assist has been met as the VA can not schedule and reschedule examinations indefinitely. However, in October 2009 the Veteran submitted a statement in which she asserted that she had not received notice of the scheduled VA examinations because she was moving from location to location to avoid an abusive partner and did not have a permanent address at the time. The Veteran requested that another examination be scheduled. She also provided VA with a new address. As the Board finds that the Veteran has presented good cause for her failure to appear for the scheduled examinations, a remand is necessary to afford the Veteran another opportunity to obtain a VA examination. The examiner is asked to render an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (fifty percent or greater) that the Veteran's bronchitis had onset in service or was caused or aggravated by the Veteran's active service. However, the Veteran is reminded that the duty to assist is not a "one-way street." Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991). It is her responsibility to promptly inform VA if she moves again and provide VA with an updated address (which will be kept confidential). Additionally, she is expected to make reasonable efforts to attend any scheduled VA examinations. The consequences of failure to report for a VA examination without good cause may include denial of the claim. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.158 and 3.655 (2009). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO should schedule the Veteran for a VA examination of her bronchitis. The examiner should note any functional impairment caused by the Veteran's disability, including a full description of the effects of her disability upon her ordinary activities, if any. The examiner is asked to render an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (fifty percent or greater) that the Veteran's bronchitis had onset in service or was caused or aggravated by her active military service. The Veteran's claim folder and a copy of this REMAND should be furnished to the examiner, who should indicate in the examination report that he or she has reviewed the claims file. All findings should be described in detail and all necessary diagnostic testing performed. 2. When the development requested has been completed, and the RO has ensured compliance with the requested action, this case should again be reviewed by the RO on the basis of the additional evidence. If the benefits sought are not granted, the Veteran and her representative should be furnished a Supplemental Statement of the Case, and be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board for further review. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter 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. 2009). _________________________________________________ JOHN J. CROWLEY 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) (2009).