BVA9506381 DOCKET NO. 93-16 115 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Denver, Colorado THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for prolapse of the rectum. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Colorado Department of Social Services WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Heather J. Harner, Associate Counsel REMAND The veteran had active duty from July 1945 to August 1946. While on active duty, the veteran underwent an operation for hemorrhoids. The veteran now contends that he has leakage from a loss of sphincter tone which resulted from the in-service operation. He avers that the operation caused nerve damage and that he has had leakage from the rectum ever since. Service connection is in effect for hemorrhoids, assigned a 10 percent evaluation. It is not clear from the medical records contained in the veteran's claims file whether the leakage results from loss of sphincter tone or whether such loss of tone could reasonably be related to the veteran's period of service either directly or proximately. In addition, the most recent medical treatment reports contained in the claims file are dated in 1990. In order to make an informed decision about this veteran's claim, the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) must be able to review more recent records describing the veteran's current condition. If such records demonstrate a current, chronic disability; the question of any relationship to service must be answered affirmatively for a grant of service connection to be warranted. To ensure that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has met its duty to assist the claimant in developing the facts pertinent to the claim and to ensure full compliance with due process requirements, the case is REMANDED to the regional office (RO) for the following development: 1. The RO should obtain the names and addresses of any private medical care providers who treated the veteran for his rectal disorders since 1990. After securing the necessary release, the RO should obtain these records. 2. The RO should obtain all records of VA medical treatment related to his rectal problems not contained in the veteran's claims file for inclusion in the file. 3. Following the receipt of these medical records, the records should be reviewed by an appropriate specialist in proctology to determine whether they confirm the presence of the claimed disability. If deemed necessary, the veteran should be scheduled for a VA medical examination to identify the veteran's various rectal disabilities. If it is determined that the veteran currently suffers from a rectal prolapse or comparable disorder then the medical records in his claims folder should be reviewed to attempt to establish an etiologic relationship between the inservice surgery or a proximate cause relationship between the veteran's service- connected hemorrhoids and a rectal prolapse. If necessary, a special proctologic examination should be conducted to obtain an expert medical opinion. 4. After the development requested above has been completed to the extent possible, the RO should again review the record. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the appellant and his representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and given the opportunity to respond thereto. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board, if in order. The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome of this case. The appellant need take no action unless otherwise notified. V. L. JORDAN Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) 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) (1994).