Citation Nr: 18150516
Decision Date: 11/15/18	Archive Date: 11/15/18

DOCKET NO. 16-19 095A
DATE:	November 15, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to payment or reimbursement for the cost of unauthorized medical treatment provided to the Veteran on October 3, 2015, at Capital Regional Medical Center is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty in the Air Force from September 1974 to October 1976.
1. Reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses is remanded.
The Veteran was seen at Capital Regional Medical Center on October 3, 2015, for a complaint of right foot pain and swelling.  She was diagnosed with right foot plantar fasciitis and discharged the same day.  
The Veteran asserts that she had been seen at VA for her right foot pain two days prior, on October 1, 2015.  She saw a doctor for a few minutes and was sent for x-rays, but was not told of the results.  The next day, her doctor was not in the office and no one would tell her the result of the x-rays.  The following day, October 3, 2015, she woke up and her right foot was still swollen and extremely painful, so she went to Capital Regional Medical Center.  It was hard to walk on the foot and she did not know if it was broken.  See the February 2016 notice of disagreement, May 2016 VA Form 9.
The claims file does not currently contain any VA treatment records relevant to the asserted treatment on October 1, 2015.  As such, the Board finds that remand is necessary to obtain any outstanding relevant records.  See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c).  
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
1. Obtain from the VA healthcare system all relevant treatment records of the Veteran’s right foot dated in September and October 2015.  All records/responses received should be associated with the claims file.  If any records sought are not obtained, a written statement to that effect should be incorporated into the record.
2. After completing the above, and any additional development deemed necessary, readjudicate the claim.  If any benefit sought on appeal remains denied, then a fully responsive supplemental statement of the case should be furnished to the Veteran and her representative, if any, and they should be afforded a reasonable opportunity for response.
 
H. SEESEL
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	N. Nelson, Counsel