Citation Nr: 21040981 Decision Date: 07/07/21 Archive Date: 07/07/21 DOCKET NO. 16-60 475 DATE: July 7, 2021 REMANDED The claim seeking to reopen a service connection claim for a disorder due to asbestos exposure, to include asbestosis, is remanded. The claim seeking to reopen a service connection claim for diabetes mellitus, type II, is remanded. The claim seeking to reopen a service connection claim for a low back disorder is remanded. The claim seeking service connection for hypertension is remanded. The claim seeking service connection for a disorder manifested by vision loss is remanded. The claim seeking service connection for a disorder manifested by a sore throat is remanded. The claim seeking service connection for a left knee disorder is remanded. The claim service connection for a right knee disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from October 1967 to August 1979. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from rating decisions issued in April and June of 2016 by a Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In November 2018, the Board remanded these claims for development, and the case has now been returned to the Board for further appellate review. 1. Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen a service connection claim for a disorder due to asbestos exposure, to include asbestosis. 2. Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen a service connection claim for diabetes mellitus, type II. 3. Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen a service connection claim for a low back disorder. 4. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension. 5. Entitlement to service connection for a disorder manifested by vision loss. 6. Entitlement to service connection for a disorder manifested by a sore throat. 7. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disorder is remanded. 8. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disorder is remanded. The Board previously remanded this case in November 2018 to provide the Veteran with release forms to allow VA to obtain his relevant, outstanding private treatment records, whose existence was indicated by the record. Thereafter, the RO issued a September 2019 development letter requesting that the Veteran complete an enclosed VA Form 21-4142 (Authorization to Disclose Information to the Department of Veterans Affairs), a form allowing VA to obtain private treatment records from providers whose addresses and treatment time frames are already of record. The Veteran completed and returned this form in December 2019; however, as the private providers' information was not of record, the RO subsequently issued a December 2019 memorandum indicating that a VA 21-4124a was required, a form similar to the original form but containing fields for identification of private treatment providers and related dates of treatment. However, the RO did not subsequently inform the Veteran of the insufficiency of his submitted release form, provide him with a VA 21-4124a (which was not enclosed in the September 2019 correspondence), or request that the Veteran complete a VA 21-4124a; rather, the RO obtained the Veteran's recent VA treatment records, readjudicated his appeal, and returned the appeal to the Board. While both VA Forms 21-4124 and 21-4124a were attached to the supplemental statement of the case readjudicating the appeal, the Veteran has not been notified of the insufficiency of his prior release form, nor has he been requested to complete a VA 21-4124a. Accordingly, this must be accomplished on remand. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998) (holding that if the Board proceeds with final disposition of an appeal, and the remand orders have not been complied with, the Board itself errs in failing to ensure compliance). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Issue a letter notifying the Veteran that VA provided an inadequate release form to him in September 2019, and request that he complete and return an enclosed VA Form 21-4124a, identifying all private treatment providers and relevant dates of treatment for treatment he has received relevant to the claims on appeal, to include health care providers associated with PacifiCare Health Systems (now part of the UnitedHealth Group). 2. Obtain complete clinical records of the evaluations and treatment from each of the providers. If there is no response from a private provider to an initial request for pertinent records, make a second request for the records (unless it is clear after the first request that a second request would be futile). J. Abrams Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board N. Northcutt, 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.