Citation Nr: 18151544
Decision Date: 11/19/18	Archive Date: 11/19/18

DOCKET NO. 16-44 772
DATE:	November 19, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to service connection for a lung condition, to include as secondary to asbestos exposure, is remanded.
Entitlement to service connection for a finger scar with nerve damage is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty in the Navy from July 1975 to July 1979. 
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2016 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in San Diego, California (Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ)).
1. Entitlement to service connection for a lung condition, to include as secondary to asbestos exposure, is remanded.
The Veteran filed his claim for entitlement to service connection for a lung condition in January 2016. He initially claimed it as “asbestos, lungs hurt when breathing,” and cited that he worked on U.S. Navy ships with an “engineer occupation.” He contends that he has a problem with his lungs and it hurts when he breathes. Additionally, he alleges he has a productive cough and suggests his problem may be related to asbestos exposure while in service. 
The Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs) are silent for any complaints noting difficulty breathing or productive coughs. VA treatment records suggest that the Veteran has been a patient at Kaiser for a number of years, but no such records are included as part of his claims file. Because these records could contain treatment for a lung condition, the Board finds these records relevant and necessary to proceed with adjudication. Additionally, the Veteran has not yet received a VA examination for any respiratory condition. As such, the Board will remand to seek the Veteran’s Kaiser records and to obtain a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any respiratory condition. 
2. Entitlement to service connection for a finger scar with nerve damage is remanded.
The Veteran filed his claim for entitlement to service connection for a finger scar with nerve damage in January 2016. He contends that in September 1978, he cut his fifth finger on his left hand down to the bone and it bled badly, causing nerve damage and resulting in four sutures. 
STRs reveal that the Veteran received sutures in September 1978, though it does not document where they were placed or for what reason. He did not note any laceration or nerve damage on his Report of Medical History at separation, nor was it listed on his separation examination. VA treatment records suggest that the Veteran has been a patient at Kaiser for a number of years, but no such records are included as part of his claims file. Admittedly, the Veteran indicated he had not received treatment for his finger since he was in service. Nonetheless, the Board will remand to obtain a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any finger scar with nerve damage.  
The matters are REMANDED for the following action:
1. The AOJ shall associate the Veteran’s most recent outstanding VA medical treatment records with his file, specifically those records from March 2016 to the present.
2. Ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142 for any private treatment providers that have treated him for any respiratory condition. Thereafter, obtain and associate with the claims folder any private treatment records identified, including Kaiser.
3. Then, the Veteran should be afforded an appropriate VA examination in order to determine the current nature and etiology of his respiratory condition. The claims file must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner.
The examiner should specifically indicate whether the Veteran has a respiratory condition, and provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that any such respiratory condition occurred in or is otherwise etiologically related to the Veteran’s military service, to include exposure to asbestos. 
The examiner should consider the following:
•	the Veteran’s STRs;
•	CAPRI medical records associated with the file in March and July 2016; and
•	the Veteran’s statements provided on in his Notice of Disagreement and his VA Form 9.
The examiner must provide all findings, along with a complete rationale for his or her opinion(s) in the examination report.  If any of the above requested opinions cannot be made without resort to speculation, the examiner must state this and provide a rationale for such conclusion.
4. The Veteran should also be afforded an appropriate VA examination in order to determine the current nature and etiology of his finger scar with nerve damage. The claims file must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner.
The examiner should specifically indicate whether the Veteran has a finger scar with nerve damage, and provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that any such injury occurred in or is otherwise etiologically related to the Veteran’s military service, to include the sutures given in September 1978 as noted on his STRs. 
The examiner should consider the following:
•	the Veteran’s STRs;
•	CAPRI medical records associated with the file in March and July 2016; and
•	the Veteran’s statements provided on in his Notice of Disagreement.
The examiner must provide all findings, along with a complete rationale for his or her opinion(s) in the examination report.  If any of the above requested opinions cannot be made without resort to speculation, the examiner must state this and provide a rationale for such conclusion.
5. Thereafter, readjudicate the claim. If any benefit sought on appeal remains denied, furnish the Veteran and his representative, if any, a supplemental statement of the case and an appropriate period of time to respond.
 
T. MAINELLI
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	Victoria A. Narducci, Associate Counsel