Citation Nr: 18143347 Decision Date: 10/18/18 Archive Date: 10/18/18 DOCKET NO. 15-45 482 DATE: October 18, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for pancreatitis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from March 2004 to February 2008. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of a May 2017 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Philadelphia, PA. The Veteran seeks service connection for pancreatitis, which he asserts is related to his service. First, the Board notes that there are no Veteran’s VA treatment records associated with the record. According to email correspondence between the Board and the RO, the Veteran’s treatment records were located and transferred to VA Regional Office 309 on 9/23/2014, but they are not in the file. See email correspondence dated February 2015 and March 2015. Thus, on remand, all outstanding VA treatment records relevant to the Veteran should be obtained and associated with the claims file. See 38 U.S.C. 5103A(c); 38 C.F.R. 3.159(c)(2); see also Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611, 613 (1992) (holding that documents which are generated by VA agents or employees are in constructive possession of VA, and as such, should be obtained and included in the record). The Veteran’s private treatment medical records show that he suffered an in-service acute pancreatitis event on October 23, 2007 and a post-discharge acute pancreatis event on December 1, 2008. In his appeal to the Board, The Veteran states that he attempted to re-enlist and was denied, due his two acute pancreatis events, and the likelihood his pancreatitis would recur. In the October 2015 VA Form 9 document, the Veteran also indicated that he was disqualified from re-entry due to the acute in-service pancreatitis event and the post-discharge acute pancreatitis event, and was told that pancreatitis can always “flare up and have issues unexpectedly at any time.” 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 service, and the record does not contain sufficient information to make a decision on the claims. 38 U.S.C. 5103A (d)(2012); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83 (2006). The requirement that the evidence "indicates" that the Veteran's disability "may" be associated with his service is a low threshold. Id. Thus, in light of the Veteran's contentions and the record on appeal, a VA examination should be obtained to determine the probable etiology of the Veteran's pancreatitis, to include whether the Veteran's pancreatitis is related to service. (d); 38 C.F.R. 3.159 (c)(4)(i). Second, the Board notes that the Veteran’s claims file does not contain the Veteran’s service personnel records. A remand is required to obtain them, as they are necessary to confirm the Veteran’s dates of service and treatment, along with any records showing that the Coast Guard denied the Veteran’s re-entry to service due to pancreatitis. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain all outstanding VA treatment records to date. All attempts to obtain these records must be documented in the claims file. The Veteran is invited to submit directly to VA any relevant records he has in his possession or that he obtains himself. 2. Obtain the Veteran’s complete service personnel records. 3. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any pancreatitis. The examiner must review the claims file in conjunction with the examination. Any and all studies, tests and evaluation deemed necessary by the examiner should be performed. The examiner must address the following: Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran’s pancreatitis is related to active service? 4. After the above requested development, and any other development deemed necessary, has been completed, readjudicate the issue on appeal. If the benefit sought remains denied, furnish the Veteran and his representative with a supplemental statement of the case and an appropriate amount of time for response. U. R. POWELL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S.E. LEARY