Citation Nr: 21006133 Decision Date: 02/03/21 Archive Date: 02/03/21 DOCKET NO. 18-53 900 DATE: February 3, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a seizure disorder, to include as secondary to service-connected disabilities, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had honorable active duty service with the United States Marine Corps from November 1959 to August 1963. The Veteran served during Peacetime. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from an October 2016 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional office (RO). The Veteran requested a hearing before the Board on his December 2018 VA Form 9, that perfected his current appeal before the Board. In January 2020 written communication, however, the Veteran withdrew his request for a legacy hearing before the Board. As such, the Board will proceed with the case based upon the evidence of record. The Veteran seeks entitlement to service connection for a seizure disorder. Although the Board sincerely regrets any delay that this may cause, further development is necessary prior to adjudicating this claim. There is evidence of a current disability; the Veteran received treatment in March 2016 at a private hospital for a seizure disorder and was started on treatment. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Moreover, there is evidence of an in-service event, insofar as the Veteran was involved in an automobile accident while in service; his separation evaluation noted scars on his scalp and forehead. See Service Treatment Records, dated August 1963, December 1960. There is insufficient evidence, however, to determine whether the in-service automobile accident was causally related to the Veteran’s seizure disorder. The Board may not substitute its judgment for that of a medical professional, to include the possibility of the 1960 accident causing or predisposing the Veteran to the seizure disorder for which he was treated in 2016. Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 171 (1991). As such, upon remand, the Veteran should receive a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his seizure disorder. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should request that the Veteran provide the names and addresses of any and all health care providers who have provided treatment for the disabilities on appeal. After acquiring this information and obtaining any necessary authorizations, the AOJ should obtain and associate these records with the claims file. The AOJ should also obtain any outstanding VA treatment records. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his seizure disorder. The Veteran's claims file, including a copy of this remand, must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. The examination report must reflect that such a review was undertaken. All necessary tests and studies should be performed, and all clinical findings should be reported in detail. The examiner is requested to answer each of the following questions: (a.) The examiner must provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's seizure disorder had its clinical onset during active service or is related to any in-service disease, event, or injury, to include the in-service automobile accident in 1960. (Continued on the next page)   (b.) The examiner must provide an opinion as to whether it is as least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's seizure disorder, is caused or aggravated by his service-connected disabilities, to include tinnitus. The examiner must provide a comprehensive report including complete rationales for all opinions and conclusions reached, citing the objective medical findings leading to the conclusions. The examiner's opinion should specifically address the Veteran's lay statements. The Veteran is competent to attest to his symptomatology, including its onset. If there is any medical reason to doubt the accuracy of the Veteran's lay statements, the examiner should provide a through explanation, utilizing his or her assessment and/or the evidence of record. A thorough rationale for all opinions would be of significant assistance to the Board. ANTHONY C. SCIRÉ, JR. Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board R. E. Trotter, 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.