Citation Nr: 20007153 Decision Date: 01/28/20 Archive Date: 01/28/20 DOCKET NO. 15-45 062 DATE: January 28, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral peripheral neuropathy is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from September 1966 to September 1969. The August 2018, the Board remanded the matter for additional development. For the reasons outlined below, remand is again needed in this matter. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Entitlement to service connection for bilateral peripheral neuropathy is remanded. The Board finds that additional development is needed prior to final adjudication of the issue on appeal. The Board remanded this matter in August 2018 for additional development seeking, inter alia, an opinion addressing the etiology of the Veteran’s claimed disability. The examiner was directed to address the Veteran’s lays statements and his conceded exposure to herbicide agents while serving in the Republic of Vietnam. However, the subsequent June 2019 VA medical opinion does not address the Veteran’s lay statements, nor does it address his herbicide exposure. Accordingly, remand is again needed. The Board notes that since the prior remand, additional statements have been submitted by the Veteran and his spouse. See e.g., Correspondence, January 2019; and Buddy/Lay Statement, January 2019. Further, the Board requests clarification regarding the etiology of the Veteran’s disability considering a private treatment record that states that the Veteran “gives a history of chronic low back pain radiating to both calves with numbness and tingling of the legs of several years duration.” See Private treatment record, February 2013. Finally, the Board notes that the claim file does not contain the Veteran’s military personnel records. Therefore, upon remand, the Board asks that these be obtained and associated with the claim file. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. After securing any necessary consent forms from the Veteran, obtain any outstanding treatment records, to include any VA and/or private treatment records, pertaining to the issue on appeal. In addition, obtain any outstanding military personnel records. All efforts to obtain these records should be documented in the claim file. If any records could not be obtained, this should be noted in the claim file. 2. Upon completion of the above, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of the disability on appeal. The examiner is asked to address whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., a 50 percent or greater probability) that any claimed diagnosed disability was caused by the Veteran’s active duty service. The examiner is asked to specifically address the Veteran’s presumed exposure to herbicide agents in the Republic of Vietnam and whether his claimed disability is causally related to herbicide exposure. The examiner should also opine whether it at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s current peripheral neuropathy (1) began during active service, (2) manifested within 1-year after discharge from service, or (3) was noted during service with continuity of the same symptomatology since service. In providing the requested opinions and rationales, the examiner must consider the Veteran’s and other lay testimony regarding the onset date, within 1-year of his return from Vietnam, of symptoms of bilateral cramping from his hips to his ankles, more prominent at night, and of tingling in his feet. The examiner should opine as to whether these symptoms, and any others the Veteran might describe, are consistent with the symptoms of peripheral neuropathy and whether from the evidence available it is possible to say the Veteran developed peripheral neuropathy within 1-year of his return from the Republic of Vietnam. The Board notes that since the prior remand, additional statements have been submitted by the Veteran and his spouse. See e.g., Correspondence, January 2019; and Buddy/Lay Statement, January 2019. Further, the Board requests clarification regarding the etiology of the Veteran’s disability considering a private treatment record that states that the Veteran “gives a history of chronic low back pain radiating to both calves with numbness and tingling of the legs of several years duration.” See Private treatment record, February 2013. The VA examiner should be given access to the claim file. The examiner should state that a review of the claim file was completed. The examiner must provide a comprehensive report including complete rationales for all opinions and conclusions reached, citing the objective medical findings leading to the conclusions. A detailed rationale is requested for all opinions provided. 3. If upon completion of the above action the issue is denied, the case should be returned to the Board after compliance with appellate procedures. E. I. VELEZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Foster, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.