Citation Nr: A21016308 Decision Date: 10/04/21 Archive Date: 10/04/21 DOCKET NO. 200305-177533 DATE: October 4, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from October 1954 to October 1956. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeal (Board) on appeal from decisions by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Veterans Health Administration (VHA). In March 2020, the Veteran filed a VA Form 10182, requesting direct review of the evidence considered by the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ). 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.201, 20.202(b)(1). Entitlement to payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses is remanded. The Board finds that the AOJ committed a pre-decisional error by failing to fulfill its regulatory duty to exhaust efforts to reconstruct and/or associate with the electronic record the Veteran's complete VHA claims file pertaining to his claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses. In an August 2021 memorandum, the VHA indicated that the Veteran's medical reimbursement file was missing documentation and/or evidence. Significantly, the memorandum indicates that, following a thorough search of various digital systems, the Veteran's claim and claims history was missing. Additionally, the file includes reports of contact dated in January 2021 which indicate that VHA was unable to print any of the claims and/or medical records. The August 2021 memorandum indicates that an attempt was made to contact the Veteran by phone, and that he was mailed a notice requesting copies of any relevant records. However, the claims file contains no documentation related to the efforts that were made in that regard. Specifically, the claims file does not contain a copy of any development letters that were sent to the Veteran. Because of the scant nature of the evidence before it, the Board is unable to give proper consideration to the Veteran's claim(s). On remand, the AOJ must ensure that all efforts have been exhausted to reconstruct and/or associate relevant documents with the electronic record, to include contacting the Veteran in writing and asking him for any relevant documents or other information in his possession, and requesting that he provide, or provide releases for, any records of private care, including billing statements, that are relevant to his claim(s) and necessary to determine whether entitlement to payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses is warranted. This matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ensure that all efforts have been exhausted to reconstruct and/or associate relevant documents with the electronic record, to include contacting the Veteran in writing and asking him for any relevant documents or other information in his possession, and requesting that he provide, or provide releases for, any records of private care, including billing statements, that are relevant to his claim(s) and necessary to determine whether entitlement to payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses is warranted. 2. Efforts to obtain the evidence should be fully documented and should be discontinued only if it is concluded that the evidence sought does not exist or that further efforts to obtain the evidence would be futile. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(2). The evidence procured, if any, should be associated with the record. 3. If any of the records sought are not available, the record should be annotated to reflect that fact, and the Veteran should be notified of (a) the identity of the records VA was unable to obtain, (b) the efforts VA made to obtain the records, (c) any further action VA will take regarding his claim(s), including, but not limited to, notice that VA will decide the claim(s) based on the evidence of record unless the Veteran submits the records VA is unable to obtain, and (d) that the Veteran is ultimately responsible for providing the evidence. DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Kettler, 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.