Citation Nr: 20007983 Decision Date: 01/30/20 Archive Date: 01/30/20 DOCKET NO. 16-56 987 DATE: January 30, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left wrist disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for colon problems due to Agent Orange as a result of exposure to herbicides is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty service from January 1967 to November 1975. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a January 2016 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In his substantive appeal (VA Form 9), the Veteran requested a Board hearing before a Veterans Law Judge. He subsequently withdrew his hearing request. Thus, the hearing request is considered to be withdrawn. The Board finds that more development is necessary prior to final adjudication of the claims on appeal. Notably, the Veteran has indicated on multiple occasions that his service treatment records are not complete as they do not include his National Guard records from a service period from 1967 to 1974. Notably, the record does not contain service treatment records from this period. The Board notes that in multiple correspondences, the RO has stated that the Veteran’s complete service treatment records were unavailable for review. Despite multiple correspondences noting that attempts were being made to obtain the Veteran’s complete service treatment records, a memorandum on a formal finding of unavailability has not been associated with the claims file. As a result, in the Board’s present review, the file does not contain his complete service treatment records. VA’s duty to assist requires it to make as many requests as necessary to secure relevant Federal records, to include service treatment records. VA may halt efforts to secure such records only if VA concludes that the records do not exist or that further efforts to secure the records would be futile. Thus, on remand, additional efforts should be taken to obtain the Veteran’s complete service treatment records and associate them with the claims file. 58 U.S.C. §5103A (b) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (c) (2) (2018). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Veteran should be requested to provide the names, addresses and approximate dates of treatment of all medical care providers, VA and non-VA, who have treated him for the disabilities on appeal. After the Veteran has signed the appropriate releases, those records should be obtained and associated with the claims folder. 2. Request the Veteran’s complete service treatment records from any appropriate source and associate them with the claims file. As set forth in 38 U.S.C.§ 5103A (b)(3) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (c)(2), the AOJ must continue efforts to locate such records until it is reasonably certain that such records do not exist or that further efforts to obtain those records would be futile. The Veteran should be notified of any action taken. All efforts to obtain these records should be memorialized in the Veteran’s VA claims file. After considering the Veteran’s statements, and other lay statement of record, determine whether any service treatment or personnel records remain outstanding but are unavailable. If so, a formal finding of unavailability should be associated with the Veteran’s claims file and notice sent to the Veteran. 3. After completion of the above and any additional development deemed necessary, the issues on appeal should be reviewed with consideration of all applicable laws and regulations. If any benefit sought remains denied, the Veteran should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and be afforded the opportunity to respond. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for appellate review, if in order. James A. DeFrank Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S.R. Fey, 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.