Citation Nr: 21004899 Decision Date: 01/28/21 Archive Date: 01/28/21 DOCKET NO. 17-18 886 DATE: January 28, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a back disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a neck disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral shoulder disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral elbow disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral wrist disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hip disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral knee disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral ankle disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral foot disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for Alzheimer’s disease is remanded. Entitlement to a finding of total disability based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is remanded. Entitlement to special monthly pension based on the need for aid and attendance or housebound status is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from November 1950 to September 1952 and from July 1954 to March 1956. The Veteran is the recipient of the Combat Infantryman Badge, among other awards. This appeal comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2016 rating decision by a Regional Office (RO) of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). These matters were previously before the Board in October 2018, at which time they were remanded for additional development. The Board directed that the RO obtain the Veteran’s complete service treatment records (STRs), obtain any outstanding VA treatment records, and ask the Veteran to complete VA Form 21-4142 for treatment records from two identified private healthcare providers. There was not substantial compliance with its October 2018 remand orders and another remand of these issues is necessary. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). A review of the file reveals that the outstanding VA treatment records have been obtained and associated with the file. The RO sent VA Forms 21-4142 to the Veteran for completion. The Veteran responded to the RO’s request in May 2020 and informed the RO to decide his case based on the evidence of record; in other words, he would not be completing the VA Forms 212-4142. In March 2019, a request for the Veteran’s complete STRs and complete service personnel file was made; it appeared that records associated with the file in 1956 were incomplete, particularly with regard to the Veteran’s first period of service. In June 2019, additional records were received and associated with the file. The received documents, which are personnel records, reveal that the Veteran made a request for his records in 1975, and was informed that his file was stored in the area destroyed by the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC). Reconstruction was attempted through review of Morning Reports and similar records, but was not successful. However, the Veteran was not informed his records were unavailable, or offered the opportunity to submit any alternative records. The subsequent supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) in fact indicates the complete records were received. On remand, the RO must make a Formal Finding of Unavailability, and detail the efforts undertaken to obtain these records, as well as properly notify the Veteran. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Properly inform the Veteran of the unavailability of his complete STRs, notify him of the opportunity to submit records in his possession or alternative records, and render a formal memorandum to the file documenting all efforts and the unavailability of the complete STRs. 2. Then readjudicate the remanded issues. If any benefits sought remain denied, the Veteran should be provided with a SSOC. The case should then be returned to the Board for appellate review if otherwise in order. WILLIAM H. DONNELLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. M. Lunger, 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.