Citation Nr: 18150930 Decision Date: 11/16/18 Archive Date: 11/16/18 DOCKET NO. 07-14 462 DATE: November 16, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a groin injury is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a stomach disorder, characterized as hyper-umbilical pain, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, not to include posttraumatic-stress disorder (PTSD), is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for a wrist disorder is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty service from June 1974 to February 1975. In April 2018, the Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veteran’s law Judge at the RO, and a transcript of the hearing is of record. In June 2018, the Board reopened the Veteran’s claim of service connection for a traumatic brain injury (TBI) and residuals of a groin injury, and granted service connection for a TBI. Moreover, the Board remanded the remaining issues on appeal. The Board also advanced the Veteran’s claim on the docket. Additionally, the Board notes that as discussed in its June 2018 decision and remand, this case has an extensive procedural history, including a prior remand from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). However, while relevant to the appeal, a discussion of the procedural history is not necessary for this herein remand. 1. Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a groin injury is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a stomach disorder, characterized as hyper-umbilical pain, is remanded. 3. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, not to include PTSD, is remanded. 4. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for a wrist disorder is remanded. 5. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on TDIU due to service-connected disabilities is remanded. The Board observes that while the RO issued a rating decision for the issues adjudicated in the Board’s June 2018 decision and remand, it failed to perform the requested development as directed by the Board in its remand directives, and issue a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). Therefore, a remand is required for further development and adjudication of the issues on appeal. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any and all treatment records from the VA Medical Center in Kalispell, Montana since June 2016. Further, the Board notes that the Veteran is homeless and has received treatment from multiple VA Medical Centers. Therefore, the AOJ should obtain all treatment records from any other VA facility from which he has received treatment. If the Veteran has received additional private treatment, he should be afforded an appropriate opportunity to submit them. 2. The AOJ should take appropriate steps to verify the Veteran’s current mailing address, to include attempting to contact the Veteran and his attorney via telephone. All efforts must be documented in the claims file. 3. After the Veteran’s mailing address has been verified, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the severity of his left wrist and hand disorder. Further, the examiner should determine the nature and etiology of his stomach disorder, residuals of a groin injury, and psychiatric disorder, not to include PTSD. The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not that these disorders are related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including as a result of a service-connected disability. The AOJ shall call both the Veteran and his attorney, and send both the Veteran and his attorney written notice of the date and time of the examination(s). 4. The RO should undertake any other development deemed necessary in order to adjudicate the TDIU claim, including obtaining any VA examinations or opinions. If the claim is not fully granted, a SSOC should be issued, and the claims file should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration. B.T. KNOPE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Meyer, Associate Counsel