Citation Nr: 1329655 Decision Date: 09/16/13 Archive Date: 09/20/13 DOCKET NO. 08-13 050A ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Cleveland, Ohio THE ISSUE Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for psychoneurosis, gastrointestinal disturbance. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Murray, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active service in the United States Navy from November 1943 to April 1946. This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeal (Board) on appeal from a July 2006 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Cleveland, Ohio. The matter was previously before the Board in July 2010 at which time the Board denied the benefits sought on appeal. The Veteran appealed the Board's July 2010 decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In March 2011, his representative and VA's Office of General Counsel, representing the Secretary of VA, filed a Joint Motion requesting that the Court vacate the Board's decision and remand the case for readjudication in compliance with directives specified. The Court issued an order in April 2011, granting the Joint Motion, and returned the case to the Board. In September 2011, in July 2012, and again in February 2013 the Board remanded the case for additional development. Please note that 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 (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND The appellant seeks an increased rating for his service- connected psychoneurosis, gastrointestinal disturbance. After the most recent readjudication of the Veteran's claim in a June 2013 supplemental statement of the case (SSOC), the Board received the Veteran's completed VA Form 21-4142, Authorization and Consent to Release Information, for private treatment records from Blanchard Valley Hospital. These records were previously identified in the February 2013 Board remand as outstanding records of pertinent treatment. These records should be obtained if possible. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(1). In addition, if the above records are associated with the claims folder, a supplemental VA medical opinion should be sought to address whether any gastrointestinal conditions identified those records obtained from Blanchard Valley Hospital and provide an opinion regarding whether any such conditions were a part of the Veteran's service-connected disability or whether any such conditions were caused or aggravated by the Veteran's service-connected disability. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran's VA treatment records dated from May 2013 to present. 2. Attempt to obtain treatment records from Blanchard Valley Hospital, as per the Veteran's March 2013 release. 3. If, and only if, the identified records from Blanchard Valley Hospital are obtained and associated with the claims file, arrange for a health care provider with appropriate expertise to review the appellant's VA claims folder. The provider should discuss the conditions to include gastrointestinal symptoms that the Veteran experienced while he was treated at Blanchard Valley Hospital. The provider should provide an opinion, with supporting rationale, as to: Whether it is at least as likely as not any of these conditions are part of the appellant's service-connected psychoneurosis, gastrointestinal disturbance. Whether it is at least as likely as not any of these conditions are caused or aggravated by the service-connected psychoneurosis, gastrointestinal disturbance. A discussion of the reasons behind all opinions expressed must be included in the examination report, to include reference to pertinent evidence where appropriate. If the provider is unable to offer any of the requested opinions, it is essential that the examiner offer a rationale for the conclusion that an opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation, together with a statement as to whether there is additional evidence that might enable an opinion to be provided, or whether the inability to provide the opinion is based on the limits of medical knowledge. 4. Upon completion of the supplemental medical opinion ordered above, review the report to ensure that they address the questions presented. Any inadequacies should be addressed prior to recertification to the Board. 5. Readjudicate the Veteran's claim, with application of all appropriate laws, regulations, and case law, and consideration of any additional information obtained as a result of this remand. If the decision remains adverse to the Veteran, he and his representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and afforded an appropriate period of time within which to respond thereto. 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). _________________________________________________ J. K. BARONE Acting 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).