Citation Nr: 21041941
Decision Date: 07/10/21	Archive Date: 07/10/21

DOCKET NO. 18-51 144
DATE: July 10, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for multiple myeloma is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

Although the Board regrets the additional delay, a remand is necessary to ensure that due process is followed and that there is a complete record upon which to decide the Appellant's claim so that she is afforded every possible consideration.  See 38 U.S.C. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. 

The Veteran had active military service from April 1961 to April 1965.  Sadly, the Veteran passed away in August 2020.  The Veteran's surviving spouse has been substituted as the Appellant. 

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from the July 2015 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  

The Appellant appeared at a July 2020 hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge.  A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record. 

Entitlement to compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for multiple myeloma is remanded.

The Appellant contends that the VA failed to timely notify the Veteran of his multiple myeloma diagnosis which led to further complications and ultimately his death in August 2020. 

At the Appellant's July 2020 Board hearing, the Appellant's representative indicated that the Veteran received a tort settlement on the same issue.  However, no documentation regarding any settlement is associated with the claims file.  Therefore, the Board finds that a remand is warranted to obtain any records associated with any tort settlement received regarding the same facts that the Appellant alleges herein. 

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Obtain any records pertaining to a Federal Tort Claims Act settlement regarding the Appellant's claim that the VA failed to timely notify the Veteran of his multiple myeloma diagnosis.  Efforts should include contacting the Tort and Administrative Law Group of the VA General Counsel office.  Document all requests for information as well as all responses in the claims file.

(Continued on the next page)

 

2. Following completion of the above, and a review of any additional evidence received, the RO should also undertake any other development it deems to be necessary, to include, if warranted, an addendum medical opinion which considers any newly received evidence.

 

 

MICHAEL MARTIN

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	S. Mountford, 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.