Citation Nr: 22018596
Decision Date: 03/29/22	Archive Date: 03/29/22

DOCKET NO. 11-05 670A
DATE: March 29, 2022

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disorder is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from January 1980 to January 1983.

The claim currently before the Board was most recently remanded in August 2021 for further development. The case is now again before the Board for further appellate action.

1. Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disorder is remanded.

In its August 2021 remand, the Board requested that the curriculum vitae of the March 2021 examiner and the newest VA examiner should be submitted to the Veteran. The Board concludes that these instructions were not followed, and remand is necessary to correct the errors.

The Board finds that the March 2021 VA examiner's (C.H.) curriculum vitae may have been sent to the Veteran, but the November 2021 VA examiner's (T.A.G.) curriculum vitae was not. The Board notes that the March 2021 VA examiner's curriculum vitae is a part of the claims file. However, there is only email correspondence indicating that the curriculum vitae was sent. The email, from October 27, 2021, has both email addresses redacted. The Board cannot confirm that the recipient's address was the Veteran's. The Board notes that the November 2021 VA examiner's curriculum vitae is not present in the claim file. Therefore, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) must send the curriculum vitae to the Veteran. 

Under the circumstances, the matter must be returned to the AOJ for compliance with the Board's prior remand instructions. Where the remand orders of the Board are not complied with, the Board errs as a matter of law when it fails to ensure compliance. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. at 271.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. The AOJ should take appropriate action to respond to the Veteran's request and provide the necessary requested educational and professional background information, including copies of the curricula vitae and other credentialing documents for the March 2021 (C.H.) and November 2021 (T.A.G.) VA examiners.

(a.) The Board emphasizes that documentation with redacted email addresses will not be considered as proof that the requested documentation was sent to the Veteran.

 

 

David Gratz

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Jonah Nelson, 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.