BVA9501798 DOCKET NO. 93-08 840 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Providence, Rhode Island THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD C. D. Hayden, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran performed active duty from May 1954 to November 1957. This matter has come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 1992 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in Providence, Rhode Island (RO) made pursuant to a claim for compensation benefits received in September 1991. REMAND In substance, it is asserted that the veteran was hospitalized for a respiratory disorder twice during service and treated by the VA for a respiratory disorder subsequent to service. Attempts to obtain service medical records pertaining to the veteran have produced the information that there are none on file at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) and that any records on file at the NPRC would have been in the area that sustained the greatest damage in the 1973 fire. A veteran who submits a claim for benefits shall have the burden of submitting evidence sufficient to justify a belief by a fair and impartial individual that the claim is well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). A well-grounded claim is a plausible claim, one which is meritorious on its own or capable of substantiation. Such a claim may not be conclusive but only plausible to satisfy the burden of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 78, 81 (1990). Although the veteran has not, at this point, submitted a well-grounded claim, there are no service medical records available through circumstances beyond his control. Therefore, the VA should give him more latitude and assistance in developing the facts pertinent to his claim. On reviewing the record in this case, the Board notes that in November 1991, the NPRC indicated that an enclosed NA Form 13055 should be completed and returned. Although the RO subsequently wrote to the veteran explaining the type of information/evidence needed to develop his claim, there is no reference to NA Form 13055 in the letter to the veteran or elsewhere in the claims folder. It is also noted that although the veteran's medical records were requested (and obtained) from the VA Medical Center in Providence, they only date back to 1991. Any earlier records regarding pulmonary problems might be helpful in deciding this case. Also, the records of hospitalization by the VA in April 1991 for a left lower lobe necrotizing pneumonia should be obtained. Finally, if the veteran was treated at a private or French governmant facility in Orleans, France, during service, copies of his records might be available from the facility. The case is accordingly REMANDED for the following additional development: 1. The veteran should be requested to identify or submit any additional evidence he wishes to have considered. The most helpful evidence would be medical evidence showing respiratory problems dating from service or medical evidence which relates the left lower lobe necrotizing pneumonia to service. If the veteran chooses to identify the evidence, he should provide sufficient detail so that VA personnel may assist him in obtaining the evidence; he should be requested to authorize its release and provided with the necessary forms to do so. The veteran should be specifically asked to identify where he was seen for pulmonary problems in Orleans France, (i.e., private, French government or U.S. military facility and the name of the facility), whether he was hospitalized or treated on an outpatient basis, and the approximate dates of treatment. He should also be asked whether he was seen by the VA for pulmonary problems prior to 1991. If he provides any identifying information, the RO should attempt to obtain copies of his medical records. 2. The RO should ask the veteran to provide the specific information needed to complete NA Form 13055. If the information is received, the form should be submitted to the NPRC. 3. The complete clinical records of the veteran's hospitalization by the VA, apparently in April 1991, for left lower lobe necrotizing pneumonia should be obtained and associated with the claims file. 4. When the foregoing development has been completed, the RO should determine whether the veteran has submitted a well-grounded claim. If so, the case should be re- adjudicated by the RO. If the benefit sought on appeal is not granted, the veteran and his representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and afforded a suitable opportunity to respond. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if in order, in compliance with the pertinent law and regulations regarding the processing of appeals. No action is required of the veteran until he receives further notice. JANE E. SHARP Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___ (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an individual member of the Board. 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. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1993).