Citation Nr: 1306907	
Decision Date: 02/28/13    Archive Date: 03/01/13

DOCKET NO.  07-20 942	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Nashville, Tennessee


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for foot problems (to include tinea pedis).  


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Disabled American Veterans


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

S. Lipstein



INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from August 1967 to July 1969.  

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2006 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Nashville, Tennessee.  

The Board remanded the case in December 2010 for further development and adjudicative action.

The Board also notes that, in addition to the paper claims file, there is a paperless, electronic claims file associated with the Veteran's claim.  A review of the documents in such file reveals that they are potentially relevant to the issue on appeal.  Thus, any future consideration of this appellant's case should take into account the existence of this electronic record.

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

While the Board regrets the additional delay in this case, for the reasons discussed below, the case must be returned to the AMC/RO for additional development.

The record reflects that Social Security Administration (SSA) disability benefits were awarded in 2001.  It appears that the Veteran submitted a copy of the 2001 SSA decision.  However, an application for SSA benefits and any underlying records upon which the decision is based are not contained in the claims file.  The SSA decision refers to a consultative examination conducted by Dr. F.F. in June 2000, which resulted in a diagnosis of status post amputation of the distal tip of the second and third toes.  Thus, the Board has determined that the missing SSA records may be relevant to his current claim for service connection for foot problems.  Therefore, on remand, a request should be made to the SSA for all records pertaining to the Veteran, including his claim for benefits as well as any medical evidence relied upon in making the decision.  See Murincsak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 363 (1992). 

Relevant ongoing medical records should also be obtained.  38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(c) (West 2002); see also Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992) (VA medical records are in constructive possession of the agency, and must be obtained if the material could be determinative of the claim).

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions:

1.  Ask the Veteran to provide the names and addresses of all private medical care providers who treated the Veteran for his feet.  After securing the necessary release, the AMC/RO should request any relevant records identified that are not duplicates of those already contained in the record.  Additionally, obtain relevant VA treatment records from the Memphis VA Medical Center, dated from April 2012 to the present.  Of any requested records cannot be obtained, the Veteran should be notified of such.

2.  Contact the SSA and request copies of all records pertinent to the Veteran, including his claim for benefits as well as any medical evidence relied upon in making the decision.  Any negative search result should be noted in the record and communicated to the Veteran. 

3.  After the development requested above as well as any additional development deemed necessary has been completed, the record should again be reviewed.  If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, then the Veteran and his representative should be furnished with a supplemental statement of the case and be given the opportunity to respond thereto.  The case should then be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if in order.

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. 2012).



_________________________________________________
K.A. BANFIELD
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) (2012).