Citation Nr: 18147328
Decision Date: 11/06/18	Archive Date: 11/02/18

DOCKET NO. 13-35 844
DATE:	November 6, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disability is remanded.
Entitlement to service connection for a heart disability is remanded.
Entitlement to service connection for tinea pedis of the right foot is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty from March 1976 to March 1996. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2011 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). These matters were previously remanded in July 2015.    
The Veteran was scheduled for a hearing on the issues before the Board in May 2014.  However, in correspondence dated April 2014, the Veteran requested      that his hearing be cancelled. Accordingly, the Board finds the hearing request withdrawn.
1. Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disability is remanded.
2. Entitlement to service connection for a heart disability is remanded.
3. Entitlement to service connection for tinea pedis of the right foot is remanded.
The July 2015 remand directed the RO to obtain treatment records from the Naval Hospital in Pensacola, Florida prior to obtaining the addendum medical opinions regarding the Veteran’s claimed disabilities.  However, the addendum medical opinions were obtained in July 2017 and the Veteran’s treatment records from the Naval Hospital were not obtained until March 2018.  Consequently, the July 2017 examiner did not consider the Naval Hospital treatment records received by VA in March 2018 in rendering her opinion and as such, the claims must be remanded for compliance with the Board’s prior instruction.  See Stegall, 11 Vet. App. at 268 (1998).  
In addition, in correspondence dated June 2016, the Veteran stated he also started to receive care from the VA clinic in Pensacola, Florida in October 2010.  The Board notes that VA treatment records obtained included an October 2010 pulmonary function test (PFT) which was noted to be scanned into Vista imaging. Moreover, an October 2010 cardiology consult at the Biloxi VA Medical Center (VAMC), which also notes a document was scanned into Vista imaging.  However, upon review of the record, the scanned documents are not contained in the claims file. 
The matters are REMANDED for the following actions:
1. Ask the Veteran to provide the names and addresses of all medical care providers who have recently treated him for his claimed disabilities.  After securing any necessary releases request any relevant records identified. In addition, obtain updated VA treatment records, to include the October 2010 pulmonary function test from the VA Joint Ambulatory Care Center in Pensacola, the October 2010 cardiology consult from Biloxi VAMC, and updated treatment records. If any requested records are unavailable, the Veteran and his representative should be notified of such.
2. After records development is completed, return the claims file to the physician who provided the medical opinions on the July 31, 2017 VA examination to obtain addendum opinions that considers the additional evidence associated with the claims file. Following review of the Naval Hospital post-service treatment records associated with the claims file in March 2018 and VA treatment referenced above, the examiner should indicate whether the additional evidence changes her opinions regarding whether the Veteran’s respiratory disability, heart disability, and tinea pedis of the right foot are related        to service. The examiner should explain why or why not.   If that examiner is not available, the file should be provided to another examiner to provide the requested opinions. If an examination is deemed necessary to respond to the request, such should be scheduled.

 
K. A. BANFIELD
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	S. Medina, Associate Counsel