Citation Nr: 21000865
Decision Date: 01/06/21	Archive Date: 01/06/21

DOCKET NO. 15-42 156
DATE: January 6, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for obstructive sleep apnea is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from January 1991 to July 1997.

In November 2018, the Veteran testified at a video conference Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ).  A transcript of the hearing is of record.

In March 2019, this appeal was remanded for further development.

However, while the appeal was pending, the Veteran submitted a private medical opinion from K.W., MD.  In that April 2019 opinion, the Dr. K.W. noted that the Veteran has been her patient since before his time in service.  However, the Board notes that these records have not been associated with the claims file.  These records may contain potentially relevant information as Dr. K.W. noted she was treating the Veteran for sleep apnea; and, that she opined that he likely had a diagnosis of sleep apnea prior to service.  

The Board also notes that in the December 2019 VA medical opinion, the VA examiner also noted that Dr. K.W. appears to be referencing her personal medical records when citing to the Veteran’s claims of having snoring issues since high school.  Thus, upon receipt of the records from Dr. K.W., the Board is requesting an addendum opinion from the December 2019 VA examiner. 

As such, a remand to obtain these records is warranted.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Obtain any updated VA and non-VA medical records relevant to the Veteran’s claim on appeal; to include the following records:

Greensboro Ear Nose & Throat of Greensboro, NC 

2. After the above is completed, to the extent possible, request an addendum opinion from the December 2019 VA examiner.

After reviewing the claims file, the reviewer should answer the following question:

Whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e. probability of 50 percent or greater) that the Veteran’s obstructive sleep apnea was incurred or aggravated by his active duty.

The examiner should discuss the Veteran’s lay statements regarding the history and chronicity of symptomatology, to include the Veteran’s ongoing reports of a sleeping problems.  S/he should outline that history in the report. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history, and such reports must be specifically acknowledged and considered in formulating any opinions.  If the examiner rejects the Veteran’s reports of symptomatology, a reason for doing so must be provided.

Additionally, the VA examiner should consider the November 2014 buddy statements by the Veteran’s brother, former spouse, and current fiancé.

The VA examiner is to also consider any updated medical records, to include those from Dr. K.W. 

Any opinion expressed by the VA examiner must “contain not only clear conclusions with supporting data, but also a reasoned medical explanation connecting the two.  See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 301 (2008).

 

 

YVETTE R. WHITE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	D. Abdelbary, 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.