Citation Nr: 1320955 Decision Date: 06/28/13 Archive Date: 07/05/13 DOCKET NO. 09-45 606 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in San Juan, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a back disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Joseph R. Moore, Attorney ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Postek, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from September 1973 to September 1974. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2008 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in San Juan, Puerto Rico. In February 2012, the Board reopened the claim for service connection for a back disorder based on the submission of new and material evidence and remanded the merits of the claim for further development. That development was completed, and the case has since been returned to the Board for appellate review. The Board further notes that the Veteran is now represented by the above-named accredited representative. A properly completed VA Form 21-22a is of record. In addition to the paper claims file, there is a Virtual VA electronic file associated with the case. However, a review of the documents in the electronic file reveals that they are either duplicative of the evidence in the paper claims file or are irrelevant to the issue on appeal. 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 The Board finds that further development is necessary prior to the final adjudication of the Veteran's claim. The Veteran has contended that he has a current back disorder that developed as a result of two injuries that he sustained during his military service. Specifically, he has claimed that he has chronic low back pain that an onset in service due to discipline by his sergeant when failing to complete an obstacle course and after falling out of a bunk bed in his barracks. The record reflects that there are outstanding records that may be pertinent to the Veteran's claim on appeal. In this regard, a September 2001 VA treatment record shows that the Veteran voluntarily quit receiving Social Security Administration (SSA) benefits to return to work. Based on review of the entire record before the Board, it appears that these benefits may have been based on disability. Moreover, in light of the long history of this case and the Veteran's assertions, the Board finds that any such records are potentially supportive of the Veteran's claim. As such, efforts to obtain these records should be made on remand. See Murincsak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 363 (1992). In addition, the Board notes that the Veteran has reported that he has received VA treatment for a number of disorders, including for his back, since separation from service. See, e.g., June 2012 written submission. A review of the file indicates that these records may be incomplete in light of the reopened claim. In this regard, there is a gap in VA treatment records between approximately 1984 and 2001. In addition, in a July 2005 rating decision, the RO indicated that VA treatment records from June 2001 to August 2008 were reviewed electronically. A review of these records was also noted in the December 2008 rating decision. While some records from that time period are associated with the claims file, it is unclear if copies of all of those electronic records were included in the claims file. The Board notes the RO's development efforts in this case to date. However, as the record reflects various private and VA treatment for the Veteran's back disorders, any outstanding medical records pertinent to the claims should be obtained on remand. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(c) (West 2002); 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 action: 1. The RO/AMC should obtain a copy of any decision to grant or deny SSA disability benefits to the Veteran and the records upon which that decision was based and associate them with the claims file. If the search for such records has negative results, the claims file must be properly documented as to the unavailability of those records. 2. The RO/AMC should also request that the Veteran provide the names and addresses of any and all health care providers who have provided treatment for his back disorders. After acquiring this information and obtaining any necessary authorization, the RO/AMC should obtain and associate these records with the claims file. The RO/AMC should also obtain any pertinent and outstanding VA treatment records, to include from the VA Caribbean Healthcare System, dated from 1984 to the present. A specific search should be made for VA medical records dated from 1984 to 2001 and for records dated from June 2001 to August 2008. All development efforts in this regard should be noted in the claims file, to include if additional attempts to obtain such records would be futile. 3. After completing the above actions, the RO/AMC should conduct any other development as may be indicated a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs. 4. When the development requested has been completed, the case should be reviewed by the RO/AMC on the basis of additional evidence. If the benefits sought are not granted, the Veteran and his 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 Veteran 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). _________________________________________________ JESSICA J. WILLS 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).