93 Decision Citation: BVA 93-12931 Y93 BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420 DOCKET NO. 92-10 795 ) DATE ) ) ) THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a spinal injury. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Michele S. Bellizaire, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The appellant served on active duty from November 1953 to September 1955. In September 1991, the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Denver, Colorado, (VARO) denied service connection for a spinal injury. The appellant was informed of the denial in a letter dated October 1, 1991. He filed a notice of disagreement on October 18, 1991. The statement of the case was issued in November 1991 and the substantive appeal was received in December 1991. A personal hearing at which the appellant testified was held on January 30, 1992. A supplemental statement of the case was issued in March 1992. The case was received and docketed by the Board of Veterans' Appeals (the Board) in July 1992. The appellant's accredited representative, Disabled American Veterans, submitted an informal presentation to the Board on October 13, 1992. REMAND The appellant is seeking entitlement to service connection for residuals of a spinal injury allegedly resulting from an automobile accident that occurred during service. After the accident in February 1954, the appellant was taken to Sacred Heart Hospital in Lamar, Colorado. Subsequently, he was transferred to Fort Ord and ultimately he was taken to the U.S. Army Hospital at Fort Carson, Colorado. A brief medical report from Fort Carson and a copy of his discharge examination are of record, but it appears that the other records from the Army relating to the accident were destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire in 1973. In 1986 the appellant injured his back while working as a carpet installer. The examining physician, Dr. David C. Greenburg, stated in a letter to the State Compensation Insurance Fund that the appellant had also been seen by Dr. Barry Lindenbaum and that he had been referred to the physical therapy department at St. Anthony's Hospital for treatment. During the personal hearing, the appellant also mentioned Dr. Lindenbaum and St. Anthony's Hospital, as well as a chiropractor named Lutz. In addition, he referred to treatment by several chiropractors over the years since service. No requests for medical records from any of those sources appears in the file. The last VA examination of record was performed in July 1991. In a statement dated March 23, 1992, the appellant commented that the examination was performed by a physician's assistant. He felt that a neurologist would have been more capable of ascertaining the cause of his current back problems. The VA examiner reached no conclusion as to the etiology of the appellant's current back problems. Additionally, the VA took x-rays of the cervical spine, but none was taken of the dorsal spine. X-rays of the dorsal spine might clarify whether the appellant initially had only an injury to the cervical spine or whether he also had a compression fracture of the 5th dorsal vertebra as stated in the radiology report from Sacred Heart Hospital in 1954. The Board is cognizant of the statutory duty placed upon the Department of Veterans Affairs to assist claimants in developing their claims. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). The Board believes that further development of the evidence is necessary in this case. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 19.9 (1992). E.F. v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 324(1991). This case is REMANDED to VARO for the following actions: 1. VARO should contact the appellant and request that he provide the addresses of Mr. Lutz and Dr. Barry Lindenbaum whom he claimed treated him after the job related incident in 1986. In addition, VARO should obtain any available medical records from St. Anthony's Hospital, where the appellant received either outpatient or inpatient care after the same incident. Proper authorization for the release of those records should be obtained from the appellant. Any unsuccessful attempts to obtain the records should be documented. All medical records obtained should be associated with the claims folder. The Service Personanel Records should be obtained and associated with the claims folder. 2. VARO should contact the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri to inquire whether there is any further abstract information available concerning the appellant's hospitalization in February 1954. Refer to M21-1, Part III, Chapter 4 for instructions on obtaining Surgeon General's Office(SGO) extracts regarding admissions to Army Hospitals between 1950 and 1954. Any extracts obtained should be associated with the claims folder. Service personnel records should also be obtained and associated with the claims folder. . 3. VARO should provide the appellant with a complete VA physical examination to include an evaluation by a specialist in neurology. Additionally, x-rays should be obtained of the dorsal spine and an evaluation made as to its current condition. Examiners should be provided with the claims folder for review prior to their examinations of the appellant. An opinion as to the etiology of any back or neck problems found should be provided, insofar as is medically ascertainable. The examinations obtained should be associated with the claims folder. After the above development has been completed, VARO should readjudicate the appellant's claim. If the claim remains denied, a supplemental statement of the case, including all applicable law and regulations, should be provided the appellant and his representative and they should be given an opportunity to respond. The purpose of this REMAND is to procure clarifying data. The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate conclusion warranted, pending completion of the requested development. The record should thereafter be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration as appropriate. No action by the appellant is required until further notice is received. BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420 * (Member temporarily absent) MATTHEW J. GORMLEY, III KENNETH R. ANDREWS, JR. *38 U.S.C.A. § 7102(a)(2)(A) (West 1991) permits a Board of Veterans' Appeals Section, upon direction of the Chairman of the Board, to proceed with the transaction of business without awaiting assignment of an additional Member to the Section when the Section is composed of fewer than three Members due to absence of a Member, vacancy on the Board or inability of the Member assigned to the Section to serve on the panel. The Chairman has directed that the Section proceed with the transaction of business, including the issuance of decisions, without awaiting the assignment of a third Member. Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.