Citation Nr: A21018907 Decision Date: 11/26/21 Archive Date: 11/26/21 DOCKET NO. 200520-193989 DATE: November 26, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to payment for cost of ambulance services on June 23, 2019 is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The decision on appeal was issued in May 2020 by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center (VAMC) and constitutes an initial decision; therefore, the modernized review system, also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA), applies. In the May 2020 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal, the Veteran elected the Direct Review docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. Evidence was added to the claims file during a period of time when new evidence was not allowed. As the Board is remanding the claim for further development, this additional evidence will be considered by the VAMC in the adjudication of the claim. Entitlement to payment for emergency medical transportation on June 23, 2019 is remanded. The May 2020 decision specifies that the claim for payment of ambulance transportation was denied because the Veteran did not meet the criteria for entitlement to beneficiary travel payment benefits laid out in 38 C.F.R. § 70.10(a)(2),(5). 38 C.F.R. Part 70 pertains to Veterans Transportation Programs, and provides a mechanism under 38 U.S.C. § 111 for the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) to make payments for travel expenses incurred to help veterans and others obtain care or services from VHA. 38 C.F.R. § 70.1. This section does not apply to payment for emergency transportation of veterans for non-service-connected conditions in non-VA facilities when the payment is authorized by 38 U.S.C. § 1725. Treatment records from Sacred Heart Medical Center reflect that the Veteran arrived by ambulance and was admitted to the hospital for critical care relating to a venomous snake bite. A June 23, 2019 Community Care- Hospital Notification Note indicates that a friend of the Veteran called and reported the hospital admission to the VAMC the same day, and a June 24, 2019 record indicates that the episode of care was eligible under 38 U.S.C. § 1725, and that the matter should be sent to the Spokane VAMC for clinical review. The evidence of record before the Board contains no further documentation as to whether VHA rendered a determination on entitlement to payment under 38 U.S.C. § 1725 for the non-VA emergency treatment provided on June 23, 2019, and/or considered whether entitlement to payment for the cost of emergency transportation to the facility was warranted under 38 U.S.C. § 1725 and 38 C.F.R. §§ 17.1002 - 17.1003. The Board shall remand for any pre-decisional error on the part of the AOJ to satisfy its duties under 38 U.S.C. § 5103A, and may remand for correction of any other error by the AOJ in satisfying a regulatory or statutory duty, if correction of the error would have a reasonable possibility of aiding in substantiating the appellant's claim. 38 C.F.R. § 20.802(a). Failure to consider entitlement to payment under 38 U.S.C. § 1725 and 38 C.F.R. §§ 17.1002-17.1003 represents a pre-decisional error by the AOJ in satisfying a regulatory duty, and remand is found warranted to correct such error. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Issue the appellant a decision and notice of decision on this matter which addresses whether or not the claim meets each of the criteria necessary for payment of cost of emergency transportation on June 23, 2019 under 38 U.S.C. § 1725 and 38 C.F.R. §§ 17.1002 - 17.1003. MICHAEL MARTIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Solomon, 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.