Citation Nr: 1753327	
Decision Date: 11/21/17    Archive Date: 12/01/17

DOCKET NO.  14-00 582	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Columbia, South Carolina


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for a facial condition as a result of a bone graft during service.


REPRESENTATION

Veteran represented by:	The American Legion


WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

The Veteran


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

A. Dean, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran had active military service from October 1982 to April 1983, from April 2005 to June 2006, and from June 2006 to September 2011.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2011 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Columbia, South Carolina.

In November 2016, a Travel Board hearing was held before the undersigned; a transcript of the hearing is associated with the record.

The appeal is REMANDED to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ).  VA will notify the appellant if further action is required.


REMAND

The Board finds that additional development is necessary before a decision may be rendered regarding the issue on appeal.

The Veteran underwent a VA examination in September 2011, where the examiner stated there was no pathology to render a diagnosis.  However, the Veteran submitted March 2012 private periodontist records reflecting a diagnosis of localized recession.  Therefore, a new VA examination should be provided to determine the etiology of the Veteran's condition, taking into consideration her hearing testimony.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

1. The AOJ should secure for association with the record updated (to the present) records of any/all VA treatment the Veteran has received for the issue on appeal.

2. After completing directive (1), the AOJ should arrange for a VA evaluation of the Veteran to ascertain the etiology of any facial condition as a result of a bone graft during service, to include her diagnosed localized recession.  Based on the record, the examiner should provide a response to the following:

Is it at least as likely as not (a 50% or higher degree of probability) that the Veteran's diagnosed localized recession, or any other facial disability, is attributable to her active serviceļ to include due to her bone graft procedure during service?  The examiner is specifically asked to comment on the Veteran's hearing testimony regarding her symptomatology.

Detailed reasons for all opinions should be provided.

3. The AOJ should then review the obtained VA examination report to ensure that the opinion contained therein is responsive to the question posed.

4. The AOJ should then review the record and readjudicate the claim, performing all additional development deemed necessary.  If the issue remains denied, issue an appropriate supplemental statement of the case and afford the Veteran the opportunity to respond.  The case should then be returned to the Board, if in order, for further appellate review.

The Veteran 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. §§ 5109B, 7112 (2012).



_________________________________________________
Nathaniel J. Doan
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Under 38 U.S.C. § 7252 (2012), 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 the appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (7).