Citation Nr: 22010232 Decision Date: 02/22/22 Archive Date: 02/22/22 DOCKET NO. 17-49 143 DATE: February 22, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from August 1965 to May 1967, including foreign service in the Republic of Vietnam. For his meritorious service, the Veteran was awarded (among other decorations) the Vietnam Campaign Medal and Vietnam Service Medal. He testified during a January 2022 virtual hearing. A transcript of this proceeding has been associated with the record. In a March 2016 VA Form 21-526EZ, the Veteran submitted a claim seeking entitlement to service connection for bilateral lower extremity neuropathy. See also March 2016 lay statement; March 2016 representative's memorandum. A March 2016 rating decision adjudicated entitlement to service connection for the bilateral upper extremities, but the lower extremities have not yet been addressed. As this issue has not yet been adjudicated by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ), the Board does not have jurisdiction over it, and it is referred to the AOJ for appropriate action. 38 C.F.R. § 19.9(b). Although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay this will cause, further development is necessary prior to the adjudication of this appeal. Critically, the Veteran has not yet been afforded VA examination for the claimed disorder; however, the claims file contains a September 2016 private treatment letter indicating a potential nexus between the claimed disorder and the Veteran's military service. This letter is not sufficiently probative upon which to grant the appeal, but does justify the need for a VA examination in accordance with McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83 (2006). During the January 2022 hearing, the Veteran's representative also noted that the claims file contains private and VA treatment records only through 2017. On remand, efforts are required to secure updated medical records. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain and associate with the record all VA treatment records for the Veteran dated from May 2017 to the present. All actions to obtain the requested records should be fully documented in the record. If they cannot be located or no such records exist, the Veteran and his representative should be so notified in writing. 2. Ask the Veteran to identify all private providers of medical treatment for his COPD since 2017. Thereafter, request that the Veteran provide authorization for release of all identified private medical records to VA. All actions to obtain the requested records should be fully documented in the record. The RO must make two attempts to obtain any private records identified, unless the first attempt demonstrates that further attempts would be futile. If private records are identified, but not obtained, the RO must notify the Veteran of (1) the identity of the records sought, (2) the steps taken to obtain them, (3) that the claim will be adjudicated based on the evidence available, and (4) that if the records are later obtained, the claim may be readjudicated. If possible, the Veteran should attempt to obtain the records himself. 3. Schedule the Veteran for an examination to assess the etiology of his COPD. The claims file and a copy of this remand must be made available for review. In particular, the examiner is asked to offer medical opinions as to: a. Identify whether the Veteran has demonstrated COPD during the period on appeal; b. If so, indicate whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran's COPD began in service, was caused by service, or is otherwise related to service, including in-service exposure to herbicide agents and/or chemical agents due to his military occupational specialty. In formulating the opinion, the examiner is advised that the term "at least as likely as not" does not mean "within the realm of possibility." Rather, it means that the weight of the medical evidence for and against the claim is so evenly divided that it is as medically sound to find in favor of the claim as it is to find against it. A complete rationale should be provided for all opinions or conclusions expressed. It should be noted that the Veteran is competent to attest to observable symptomatology. If there is a medical basis to support or doubt the history provided by the Veteran, the examiner should provide a fully reasoned explanation. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Kovarovic, 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.