Citation Nr: 1338253 Decision Date: 11/21/13 Archive Date: 12/06/13 DOCKET NO. 12-22 538 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Montgomery, Alabama THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Paralyzed Veterans of America, Inc. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. L. Wolinsky Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active military service from February 1983 to February 1987. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2010 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Montgomery, Alabama. The Veteran seeks service connection for arteriosclerotic heart disease (coronary artery disease). The Board must note that in reviewing this case the Board has not only reviewed the Veteran's physical claims file, but also his file on the electronic "Virtual VA" system to insure a total review of the evidence. 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 In the Veteran's Statement of Accredited Representation in Appealed Case (VA Form 646) received August 2010, the Veteran contends that during active service he experienced chest pains. The Veteran further stated that he was told by a military physician to take aspirin for his pain. In the Veteran's Notice of Disagreement received November 2010, the Veteran contends that his current coronary artery disease is related to active duty. Full service treatment records (STRs) from the Veteran's period of active duty have not been located after the RO attempted to procure them through official services. Where service medical records are missing, VA has a duty to search alternate sources of service records. Washington v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 362 (2005). The service department has indicated that additional service treatment records may be in the Veteran's possession. The Veteran should be given one more opportunity to submit any STRs he may have, as well as any additional post-service medicals not already provided. VA is obliged to provide an examination when the record contains competent evidence that the claimant has a current disability or signs and symptoms of a current disability, the record indicates that the disability or signs and symptoms of disability may be associated with active service; and the record does not contain sufficient information to make a decision on the claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(d); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). Thus, as there is an indication through lay statements, and the statements made in a "buddy statement", of an in-service injury with treatment regarding the Veteran's chest pain, he should be afforded a VA examination to determine if there is a nexus. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO should send to the Veteran and his representative a letter requesting that the Veteran provide sufficient information, and if necessary, authorization to enable it to obtain any additional evidence pertinent to the claims on appeal that is not currently of record. The RO should specifically request that the Veteran submit any copies of his service treatment records that he may have in his possession. 2. If the Veteran responds, the RO should assist him in obtaining any additional evidence identified, following the current procedures set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. All records/responses received should be associated with the claims file. If any records sought are not obtained, the RO should notify the Veteran and his representative of the records that were not obtained, explain the efforts taken to obtain them, and describe further action to be taken. 3. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination by a qualified physician to determine whether coronary artery disease is related to service. The claims folder must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether there is a 50 percent or better probability (whether it is at least as likely as not) that the Veteran's coronary artery disease had its onset in or is otherwise related to his active military service. The examiner should set forth the complete rationale for all opinions. The absence of evidence of treatment for symptoms in the Veteran's service treatment records cannot, standing alone, serve as the basis for a negative opinion. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report in-service events and treatment, his symptoms and history, and such reports must be specifically acknowledged and considered in formulating any opinions. If the examiner rejects the Veteran's reports, the examiner must provide a reason for doing so. 4. Thereafter, readjudicate the claim. If the benefits sought on appeal remain denied, the Veteran and his representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case and given an opportunity to respond before the case is returned 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 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). _________________________________________________ WAYNE M. BRAEUER 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).