Citation Nr: 1321472	
Decision Date: 07/03/13    Archive Date: 07/12/13

DOCKET NO.  08-37 036	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Des Moines, Iowa


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death (under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151).


WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant and her son


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

K. Curameng, Counsel



INTRODUCTION

The Veteran had active duty service from July 1956 to June 1960.  He died in January 2008.  The appellant is advancing her appeal as the Veteran's widow.

This matter came to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a May 2008 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  This matter was remanded in May 2012 for further development.  The appellant testified at an April 2012 Board video conference hearing.  A transcript is of 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

It appears to the Board that there may be additional outstanding private and VA treatment records.  A January 2011 Interrogatory cites to various treatment records that have not been associated with the Veteran's claims file: a July 23, 2007 treatment record showing that the Veteran was issued a cane and given instructions on how to use it; an August 3, 2007 treatment record from Vasanthkumar Kuchangi, M.D. who noted that the Veteran's wife stated that the Veteran used a walker; and an August 15, 2007 report by Marie Chapin, LPN that the Veteran had been walking on his left foot for the past three weeks.  In addition, the Veteran's death certificate notes that the Veteran was an inpatient at a VA medical facility in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.  Records from that VA facility documenting the reason for admission, treatment and actual death do not appear to be associated with the claims file. 

Although the Board regrets further delay, the case must be returned to the RO for additional development.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions:

1.  Appropriate action should be taken to obtain treatment records listed in the January 2011 Interrogatory: a July 23, 2007 treatment record; an August 3, 2007 treatment record from 
Dr. Vasanthkumar; and an August 15, 2007 report by Marie Chapin, LPN. 

2.  The RO should secure copies of the VA medical records from Sioux Falls, South Dakota reflecting inpatient treatment prior to his death.  If records are unavailable, the reason for their unavailability must be noted in the record (along with a notation of the scope of the search for the records), and the appellant should be so notified.  

3.  All obtained medical records should be associated with the claims file.

4.  After completion of the above and any additional development which the RO may deem necessary, the RO should then review the expanded record and readjudicate the issue on appeal.  The RO should issue an appropriate supplemental statement of the case, and give the appellant the opportunity to respond.  The case should then be returned to the Board, if in order, 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. 2012).



_________________________________________________
ALAN S. PEEVY
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).