Citation Nr: 1406357 Decision Date: 02/12/14 Archive Date: 02/24/14 DOCKET NO. 11-06 608 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Indianapolis, Indiana THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD T. S. Kelly, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran, who is the appellant, had active service from March 1965 to April 1967 and from August 1967 to November 1970. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2010 rating determination of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) located in Indianapolis, Indiana. The Veteran appeared at a hearing before a local hearing officer at the RO in December 2011. A transcript of the hearing 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 The Veteran believes that MDS is related to his exposure to Agent Orange (AO) while in Vietnam. His service personnel records demonstrate that he had service in Vietnam. While MDS is not on the list of presumptive diseases associated with exposure to AO, the Veteran has provided medical treatise evidence showing a possible association between exposure to benzene, which is a component of AO, and MDS. 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). The threshold for finding a link between current disability and service is low. Locklear v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 410 (2006); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83 (2006). To date, the Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination to obtain an opinion as to the nature and etiology of MDS, and its relationship, if any, to his period of service, to include exposure to AO. Based upon the above, the Veteran should be afforded a VA examination to assist in determining the etiology of any current MDS and its relationship, if any, to his period of active service. Furthermore, as this matter is remand status, an attempt should be made to obtain all outstanding records, VA and private, relating to the Veteran's claimed MDS. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Request that the Veteran provide the names and addresses of any treatment facilities/providers that have provided treatment for MDS. Following receipt of the above names and addresses, along with written authorizations from the Veteran, obtain and associate with the record copies of all treatment records of the Veteran from those facilities/physicians identified by him. If the Veteran identifies any VA treatment facilities, obtain copies of treatment records from these facilities and associate them with the record. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination by an appropriate medical specialist to assist in determining the nature and etiology of any current MDS. All indicated tests and studies should be performed and all findings should be reported in detail. The claims folder and all other pertinent records should be made available for review and the examiner should note such review in his/her report. Following examination, the examiner should render the following opinion: Is it as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that any current MDS, if found, is related to the Veteran's period of service, to include any exposure to AO while in Vietnam? Complete detailed rationale, to include reference to the medical treatises submitted by the Veteran, must be provided. 3. Review the claims file. If any development is incomplete, including if the examination report does not contain sufficient information to respond to the questions posed, take corrective action before readjudication. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 4. After undertaking any other development deemed appropriate, the AMC/RO should readjudicate the claim of service connection for MDS. If the benefit sought is not granted, the Veteran and his representative should be furnished with a supplemental statement of the case and afforded an opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board for future review. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter 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). _________________________________________________ M. TENNNER 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).