Citation Nr: 1012385 Decision Date: 04/02/10 Archive Date: 04/14/10 DOCKET NO. 07- 00 727 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Winston- Salem, North Carolina THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for chronic ulnar styloid nonunion of right wrist and right SLAC wrist. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD James A. DeFrank, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active service from March 1964 to October 1971. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2005 rating decision of the Winston-Salem, North Carolina Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which denied entitlement to service connection for chronic ulnar styloid nonunion of right wrist and right SLAC wrist. In February 2010, the Veteran attended a hearing at the RO before the undersigned. The transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims file. 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 VA is obliged to provide an examination when the record contains competent evidence that the claimant has a current disability or signs and symptoms of a current disability, the record indicates that the disability or signs and symptoms of disability may be associated with active service; and the record does not contain sufficient information to make a decision on the claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(d) (West 2002). The evidence of a link between current disability and service must be competent. Wells v. Principi, 326 F.3d 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2003). The threshold for triggering VA's duty to provide an examination is low. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). There are competent diagnoses of current chronic ulnar styloid nonunion of right wrist and right SLAC wrist. The Veteran's service treatment records show that he was treated for a bilateral wrist injury in December 1964. In a November 2004 medical opinion, the Veteran's treating physician indicated that the Veteran's current wrist disability represented a chronic degenerative process from a remote injury with recent exacerbation. The doctor concluded that the only significant injury the Veteran recalled was his December 1964 injury and that the degree of degenerative changes would be consistent with an injury of this duration. However, there is no indication that the doctor reviewed the Veteran's service treatment records or post-service medical record. Further development is needed so that a medical professional can review the entire medical record, consider a complete history, and provide an informed opinion as to the relationship between the current chronic ulnar styloid nonunion of right wrist and right SLAC wrist disability and service. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Veteran should be requested to provide the names, addresses and approximate dates of treatment of all medical care providers, VA and non-VA, who have treated him for the disability on appeal. After the Veteran has signed the appropriate releases, those records should be obtained and associated with the claims folder. Appropriate efforts must be made to obtain all available VA treatment records. All attempts to procure records should be documented in the file. If the AMC/RO cannot obtain records identified by the Veteran, a notation to that effect should be inserted in the file. The Veteran is to be notified of unsuccessful efforts in this regard, in order to allow him the opportunity to obtain and submit those records for VA review. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA orthopedic examination to determine whether he has a current right wrist condition that is related to service. The examiner should review the claims folder and note such review in the examination report or in an addendum. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether the Veteran has a current right wrist condition and, if so, whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the right wrist condition began in service or is otherwise the result of a disease or injury in service. The examiner should provide a rationale for these opinions. 3. Then re-adjudicate the claim. If the determination remains unfavorable to the veteran, issue a supplemental statement of the case before returning the case to the Board, if otherwise in order. 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. 2009). _________________________________________________ WAYNE M. BRAEUER 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).