Citation Nr: 1019028 Decision Date: 05/24/10 Archive Date: 06/04/10 DOCKET NO. 09-41 658 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Houston, Texas THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Texas Veterans Commission ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD T. M. Gillett, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION Please note this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2009). 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002). The Veteran served on active duty from January 1951 to July 1974. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from an August 2005 decision and notice of decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Houston, Texas, which denied the appellant's claim for the cause of the Veteran's death. 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 A preliminary review of the record discloses a need for further development prior to appellate review. The Veteran died in September 2006. On the September 2006 death certificate, it was noted that the Veteran died while being treated as an inpatient at the Compass Hospital of San Antonio. The immediate cause of death was listed as end stage renal disease. Also listed was chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as a significant condition leading to death. In a November 2006 amendment to the death certificate, the immediate cause of death was changed to coronary artery disease with congestive heart failure. COPD was again listed as a significant condition leading to death. At the time of his death, the Veteran had no service- connected disabilities. The claims file does not contain any treatment records from Compass Hospital of San Antonio, to include any treatment records written during the Veteran's last period of hospitalization. As stated above, the immediate cause of the death listed on the Veteran's death certificate was amended with no explanation given as to the reasons for the amendment. As such, the hospital records could have great probative value in this matter, as they would offer more information as to the cause of the Veteran's death. In accordance with the VA's duty to assist, the Board finds that all pertinent evidence relating to the cause of the Veteran's death, to include all treatment records from the Compass Hospital of San Antonio, must be obtained and associated with the claims file. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(c)(2) (West 2002 & Supp. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(1)(2) (2009). Parenthetically, the Board notes that Compass Hospital of San Antonio's current website indicates that it ceased operations as of April 2010. For information regarding the former hospital's medical records, the website suggests contacting Sandra Meeks at the Laurel Ridge Medical Center. In light of this information, in complying with the obligations of this remand, the AMC/RO is requested to take whatever reasonable steps are required in procuring the Compass Hospital treatment records, to include contacting the Laurel Ridge Medical Center. Finally, the Board notes that the record contains a January 2009 VA medical opinion. In this opinion, a VA clinician found that the Veteran's death was less likely than not caused by, related to, or aggravated by early chemical diabetes, a disorder diagnosed in service in 1974. In writing this opinion, however, the examiner did not have the benefit of reviewing any records from Compass Hospital of San Antonio or any other records procured as a result of this remand. As such, after procurement of the aforementioned records, the AMC/RO should request that the author of the January 2009 VA medical opinion re-review the entire claims file and write an amendment to her initial opinion, indicating any changes in her conclusions. If the author of the January 2009 VA medical opinion is unavailable, another examiner should review the evidence on the basis of the entire record. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: (Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2009). Expedited handling is requested.) 1. The AMC/RO should request the appellant to identify the names, addresses, and approximate dates for all VA and non-VA health care providers who provided treatment for the Veteran's cardiovascular, renal, and lung disorders prior to his death. The AMC/RO must include the correct authorization and release forms to allow for the procurement of such records. Upon return of said release forms, the AMC/RO should attempt to procure such records. At a minimum, the AMC/RO should seek to acquire the Veteran's treatment records from either Compass Hospital of San Antonio or the keeper of that facility's records (i.e., Laurel Ridge Medical Center). 2. After procurement of all necessary records and any other development, the AMC/RO should request that the physician's assistant who provided the January 2009 VA medical opinion re-review the entire claims file and write an amendment to her initial opinion, indicating any changes in her conclusions in light of any recently acquired evidence. If the author of the January 2009 VA medical opinion is unavailable, another medical professional should review the evidence on the basis of the entire record. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as like as not that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus had its initial manifestations in service. If so, the examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's diabetes caused or worsened his coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, COPD. 3. After the above development is performed, the AMC/RO should readjudicate the issue of service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death. If the benefit sought on appeal is not granted to the appellant's satisfaction, the appellant and her representative must be provided with a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC). An appropriate period of time should then be allowed for a response, 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 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). _________________________________________________ JAMES L. MARCH 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).