Citation Nr: 21001727 Decision Date: 01/11/21 Archive Date: 01/11/21 DOCKET NO. 14-11 548 DATE: January 11, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for lumbar spine disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right leg disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1958 to December 1963. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2012 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office (RO). In August 2018, the Veteran testified at a Board videoconference hearing before the undersigned. A copy of the transcript of that hearing has been associated with the claims file. By way of history, the Veteran’s service connection claims for lumbar spine and right leg disabilities were denied in a July 2015 Board decision. The Veteran appealed the Board’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a February 2016 Order, the Court vacated the Board’s July 2015 decision and remanded for readjudication in compliance with the Joint Motion for Remand (JMR). In pertinent part, the JMR found the Board erred by not obtaining VA examinations and by failing to consider favorable evidence. Thereafter, in April 2016, the Board remanded the claims to obtain private treatment records and VA examinations. A subsequent May 2017 Board decision found the VA examinations inadequate and remanded to obtain new VA examinations. Thereafter, a November 2017 Board decision again denied the service connection claims on appeal. The Veteran appealed the Board’s decision to Court. In a November 2018 Order, the Court vacated the Board’s November 2017 decision and remanded for readjudication in compliance with the JMR. In pertinent part, the JMR found that Board erred by not obtaining updated VA treatment records. Following the November 2018 Order, the case was remanded in June 2019 to obtain updated VA treatment records. Thereafter, in February 2020, the Board remanded this case and instructed the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) to obtain VA examinations. The Board notes that the requested VA examinations were obtained in August and October 2020 and have been associated with the claims file. Accordingly, after reviewing the actions of the AOJ, the Board finds there was substantial compliance with the requested development. Dyment v. West, 13 Vet. App. 141 (1999); Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 1.-2. Lumbar Spine and Right Leg Disability Initially, the Board notes that in a November 2017 letter, the Veteran stated that he would like to appoint his daughter as his fiduciary. Additionally, a December 2017 letter from VA notified the Veteran that he had been found incompetent by a physician, and, therefore, incompetent to manage his VA payments. Thereafter, a May 2018 VA Form 27-0820, Report of General Information, noted that the Veteran’s daughter was contacted as she was the Veteran’s fiduciary in order to schedule a VA examination. Further VA communications addressed the Veteran’s daughter as his custodian. See May 2018 and May 2019 VA letters. Accordingly, the Veteran’s daughter has been recognized by VA as his fiduciary. In February 2020, the Veteran submitted VA Form 21-4142a, General Release for Medical Provider Information to VA, and identified Taos Physical Therapy and El Centro Family Health with dates of treatment listed from January 2018 to February 2020. A VA Medical Records Request Reject Notice was issued in February 2020 noting a missing VA Form 4142, Authorization to Disclose Information to VA. Thereafter, in March 2020, the Veteran faxed another copy of the above-mentioned VA From 21-4142a and a VA Form 21-4142. In an April 2020 letter, VA notified the Veteran and his fiduciary that the submitted VA Form 21-4142 was missing the signature page. A signature page was submitted later that month signed by the Veteran’s daughter. However, a subsequent April 2020 VA Medical Records Request Reject Notice noted that the signature was invalid. In this regard, a May 2020 email from the Veteran’s service representative noted that the Veteran’s daughter was the fiduciary on file, and, therefore, that the signature was valid. In a separate May 2020 email which appears to be an internal VA communication, the text states, “I am in the St. Petersburg RO [and] I have a DOMA request that was [rejected] for invalid signature, but the signature is valid because the signature is the daughters which is the fiduciary... and it is on file. [Is] there a way you all can continue going out for the records with the valid 4142-4142a in the system?” Most recently, a July 2020 VA Medical Records Request Reject Notice again noted that the signature was invalid. As noted above, the Veteran has appointed his daughter as his fiduciary which has been recognized by VA. Accordingly, the record shows that the Veteran has submitted valid forms identifying private medical records in order for the AOJ to obtain those records. However, the record further shows that no attempt has been made by the AOJ to obtain the identified private treatment records. Accordingly, a remand is necessary to obtain the identified private medical records. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: (Continued on the next page)   With any necessary identification of sources by the Veteran and/or his fiduciary, request all private treatment records not already associated with the file, including records from Taos Physical Therapy and El Centro Family Health. If these records are unavailable, a written statement to this effect must also be incorporated into the claims file. S. HENEKS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Lamb, 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.