Citation Nr: 1322547 Decision Date: 07/15/13 Archive Date: 07/24/13 DOCKET NO. 12-04 580 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Albuquerque, New Mexico THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral wrist disability. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant and spouse ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A.M.Clark, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from September 1943 to December 1945. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2010 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in March 2013. A copy of the transcript is of record. This case was previously before the Board in May 2013 when claims for whether new and material evidence had been received to reopen claims of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss and for a back disability were denied. A claim for service connection for a bilateral wrist disability was reopened and remanded to obtain outstanding VA treatment records and provide the Veteran a VA examination. The issue of entitlement to an increased rating for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been raised by the record, but has not been adjudicated by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). Therefore, the Board does not have jurisdiction over that issue, and it is referred to the AOJ for appropriate action. This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012). 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002). The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center in Washington, D.C. REMAND Unfortunately, another remand is required in this case. Although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, it is necessary to ensure that there is a complete record upon which to decide the Veteran's claim so that he is afforded every possible consideration. The May 2013 Board found that the evidence of record indicates that the Veteran has sought treatment for complaints of wrist pain since service. Moreover, he alleges a continuity of symptomatology of that disability since service. Supporting those assertions are two letters received in June 2010 from the Veteran's niece and sister-in-law attesting that he has suffered from wrist problems since at least 1946, one year after service. The Veteran's service separation form shows that the Veteran had a primary specialty as a fireman aboard the USS California. A letter from a United States Army and Joint Services Record Research Center (JSRRC) Coordinator verifies that the Veteran served aboard the USS California (BB-44) from December 7, 1943, to December 15, 1945. The letter indicates that the Veteran and his ship participated in the bombardment of Saipan, Guam, and the Tinian Islands and the Battle of the Surigao Strait. The letter additionally shows that the ship was hit by shore fire as well as a kamikaze plane while the Veteran was onboard. The Veteran has attributed his bilateral wrist problems to trauma suffered from loading projectiles weighing 54 pounds, for over two years, into guns. He asserts that he has continued to have problems with his wrists since service. The Veteran has been diagnosed with degenerative disease of the wrists. The Veteran underwent a June 2013 VA examination. The VA examiner indicated that he could not determine whether it was at least as likely as not that the Veteran's current bilateral wrist disability was related to service without resorting to mere speculation. The rationale appears to be primarily based on the fact that there are no documented complaints of wrist problems in service, or until September 2003 following service. However, the Board notes that the fact that the Veteran did not obtain treatment for many years following separation from service is not entirely fatal to a service connection claim. For the foregoing reasons, the Board finds that the June 2013 VA examiner's opinion is inadequate, and the RO must obtain a new opinion as to whether the Veteran's current bilateral wrist disability is related to his service. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions: This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012). Expedited handling is requested. 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA joints examination with a medical doctor VA examiner who has not previously examined the Veteran. The examiner must review the claims file and must note that review in the report. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) that any current bilateral wrist disability, to include its arthritis, had its onset during the Veteran's active service or is otherwise causally related to service, to include the loading of weapons. The examiner is to presume that the Veteran sustained trauma to his wrists as a result of loading guns, multiple times a minute, with projectiles weighing 54 pounds during active service. Any opinion offered should be accompanied by a clear rationale consistent with the evidence of record. 2. Then readjudicate the claim. If the decision is adverse to the Veteran, issue a supplemental statement of the case and allow the appropriate time for response. Then, return the claim to the Board. 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 or the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012). _________________________________________________ HARVEY P. ROBERTS 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).