Citation Nr: 1404644 Decision Date: 02/03/14 Archive Date: 02/14/14 DOCKET NO. 10-42 460 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Waco, Texas THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a skin disorder, including chloracne, including as due to herbicide exposure while in service. REPRESENTATION The Veteran represented by: Texas Veterans Commission WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The Veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD B. Rideout, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active duty service from November 1969 to September 1971 and active duty for training service from March 1979 to August 1979. He also had additional service with the National Guard. He served in Vietnam from December 12, 1970 to July 22, 1971 and is in receipt of the Vietnam Service Medal with one campaign star and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 60 device. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2009 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Waco, Texas. The Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Acting Veterans Law Judge at the RO in October 2013. A transcript of that hearing has been associated with the claims file. The Board notes that, in addition to the paper claims file, there is a Virtual VA paperless claims file associated with the Veteran's claim. A review of the documents in such 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 Veteran if further action is required. REMAND The Board finds that a remand is necessary in this case in order to obtain medical records and a medical opinion. The Veteran offered testimony at his hearing which indicated that additional providers have treated him for his hearing loss and chloracne. These records are not associated with his claims file. If said records show that the Veteran currently has a skin disorder, the Veteran should be afforded a VA examination for this disorder. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Request that the Veteran provide the names and addresses of any and all health care providers who have provided treatment for his hearing loss and chloracne. After acquiring this information and obtaining any necessary authorization, obtain and associate these records with the claims file, to include medical records from the Veteran's private employer, Dr. EW, Dr. BJ, and any updated VA records. 2. After the above development has been completed, the Veteran should be afforded a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any skin disorder that may be present. Any and all studies, tests, and evaluations deemed necessary by the examiner should be performed. The examiner is requested to review all pertinent records associated with the claims file, including the Veteran's service treatment records, post-service medical records, and statements in the record. An explanation for all opinions expressed must be provided. If an opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation, it must be noted in the examination report, and an explanation provided for that conclusion. The examiner should opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran has chloracne or an acneform disease consistent with chloracne. If there is such a diagnosis, the examiner must provide an opinion regarding the onset of that diagnosis. If another skin disorder is diagnosed, the examiner must provide an opinion regarding whether such a skin disorder is at least as likely as not causally or etiologically related to his military service, to include exposure to herbicides. (The term "at least as likely as not" does not mean within the realm of medical possibility, but rather that the medical evidence both for and against a conclusion is so evenly divided that it is as medically sound to find in favor of a certain conclusion as it is to find against it.) 3. After completing the above actions, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs, the Veteran's claims should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If the claims remain denied, the Veteran and his representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case, and an appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the 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. 2013). _________________________________________________ K. MILLIKAN 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) (2013).