Citation Nr: 1318050 Decision Date: 06/04/13 Archive Date: 06/11/13 DOCKET NO. 06-08 418 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for residuals of subretinal hemorrhage of the left eye. 2. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for coccidioidomycosis. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Florida Department of Veterans Affairs WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The Veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K. M. Schaefer, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from January 1984 to January 2004. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or Board) on appeal from a rating decision issued in August 2004 by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Wichita, Kansas. Jurisdiction was subsequently transferred to the St. Petersburg RO. In April 2013, the Veteran testified at a personal hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge, via videoconference. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims file. At the hearing, the Veteran raised a claim of entitlement to service connection for a muscle disability associated with the coccidioidomycosis. This issue has not been adjudicated by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). Therefore, it is referred to the AOJ for appropriate action. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the Veteran if further action is required. REMAND The Board's review of the record determines that a remand is necessary to allow for further development of the claims. Initially, the Board notes that the Veteran testified at the April 2013 Board hearing that she had an upcoming appointment with an eye doctor, and that an opinion would be obtained at that time from the eye doctor, for submission to the Board, as to the worsening of symptoms of the service-connected eye disability. (See Transcript of the April 2013 Board hearing at page 4.) However, even though she prospectively waived RO consideration of this evidence for when it was received by VA, no record of this appointment is associated with the claims file. In fact, there are no treatment records associated with the claims file, and the Veteran has not been requested to submit such records since the February 2004 VCAA letter. Therefore, the Veteran should be asked to identify the locations of all VA and private treatment received for her service-connected disabilities at issue, and to provide a VA Form 21-4142, Authorization and Consent to Release Information to VA, if necessary. Once her response has been received, all identified records should be associated with the claims file. Additionally, the most recent VA examinations in this case were conducted in March 2007 and April 2007, over six years ago. The Board determines that more recent findings as to the current nature and severity of the service-connected disabilities at issue would be useful in adjudicating the issues on appeal. Moreover, the Veteran testified at her April 2013 Board hearing to symptoms that suggested an increase in severity of her eye disability and residuals of coccidioidomycosis. Generally, when a claimant asserts that the severity of a disability has increased since the most recent rating examination, an additional examination is appropriate. VAOPGCPREC 11-95 (April 7, 1995); see also Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994). Therefore, the Board determines that a remand is also necessary so that additional VA examinations to assess the current severity of her service-connected disabilities may be scheduled. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Request that the Veteran identify all VA and private treatment pertinent to her service-connected disabilities, to include an eye doctor appointment on April 16, 2013, and to submit a VA Form 21-4142, Authorization and Consent to Release Information to VA, if necessary. Thereafter, the identified records should be added to the claims file. All requests and responses, positive and negative, must be documented in the claims file. 2. Schedule the Veteran for the appropriate VA examination to assess the current nature and severity of her service-connected eye disability. The claims file must be made available to the examiner, and the examination report must reflect that such review occurred. All tests and studies deemed necessary must be performed. All pertinent symptomatology and findings should be reported in detail. To the extent possible, manifestations of nonservice-connected eye disability present must be distinguished from manifestations of the service-connected eye disability. 3. Schedule the Veteran for the appropriate VA examination to assess the current nature and severity of her coccidioidomycosis and its residuals. The claims file must be made available to the examiner, and the examination report must reflect that such review occurred. All tests and studies deemed necessary must be performed. All pertinent symptomatology and findings should be reported in detail. 4. Notify the Veteran that it is her responsibility to report for the examination and to cooperate in the development of the claim. The consequences for failure to report for any VA examination without good cause may include denial of his claim. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.158, 3.655 (2012). 5. After completing the above actions, and any other development deemed necessary, readjudicate the issues on appeal. If the benefit sought remains denied, provide a supplemental statement of the case to the Veteran and her representative, and return the appeal to the Board for appellate review, after the Veteran has had an adequate opportunity to respond. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the 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. 2012). _________________________________________________ U. R. POWELL 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).