Citation Nr: 21020890 Decision Date: 04/08/21 Archive Date: 04/08/21 DOCKET NO. 16-62 743 DATE: April 8, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a lumbosacral strain is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include as secondary to service-connected Hepatitis C, is remanded. Entitlement to a rating higher than 10 percent for the Hepatitis C is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served in the National Guard from September 1977 to July 1978 and on active duty from February 1979 to July 1985. The Veteran testified in support of these claims during a hearing in January 2020 before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) of the Board. A transcript of the hearing is of record.   In June 2020, the Board remanded these claims back to the local Regional Office (RO), i.e., Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for further development and consideration – including especially to obtain all outstanding treatment records relevant to these claims (whether from VA or private providers) and then for a supplemental (addendum) medical opinion concerning whether the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disorder is secondary to (meaning caused or aggravated by) his already determined to be service-connected Hepatitis C and for a VA examination reassessing the severity of his service-connected Hepatitis C. Unfortunately, however, the Board finds that those remand instructions have not been completed as directed. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998) (holding that a remand by the Board confers upon the Veteran, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand instructions); but see also D'Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97, 105 (2008) (holding that only “substantial” rather than strict or exact compliance with the Board's remand directives is required under Stegall); accord Dyment v. West, 13 Vet. App. 141, 146-47 (1999). These claims of entitlement to service connection for a lumbosacral strain and for an acquired psychiatric disorder and for a rating higher than 10 percent for Hepatitis C are again remanded. In the prior June 2020 remand, the Board directed the RO (AOJ) to obtain all outstanding treatment records, including specifically VA treatment records from the Manhattan, Bronx, and West Palm Beach VA Medical Centers (VAMCs). To this end, VA treatment records from West Palm Beach and New York Harbor Health System (which encompasses the Manhattan VAMC) were obtained and associated with the claims file so they may be considered in deciding this appeal. However, there are no treatment records from the Bronx VAMC, which apparently is not part of the New York Harbor Health System. During his January 2020 hearing before this Board, the Veteran testified that he had received mental health care at the Bronx VAMC soon after his separation from service. Thus, these records are pertinent to this appeal and VA consequently must try to also obtain these other records and associate them with the claims file so that they, too, may be considered in deciding this appeal. Doing this will ensure compliance – or at least the acceptable substantial compliance, with this remand directive. The RO must make the required attempts to obtain these other records before concluding they no longer exist or are unobtainable. In that eventuality, the Veteran also must be appropriately notified. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c) and (e). Accordingly, these claims are again REMANDED for the following action: Obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records from the Bronx VAMC (James J. Peters VAMC) for the period from July 1985 to the present. If these records no longer exist, document the efforts that were made to obtain them and appropriately notify the Veteran. KEITH W. ALLEN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Pak 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.