Citation Nr: 0000076 Decision Date: 01/04/00 Archive Date: 12/28/01 DOCKET NO. 98-03 500 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Des Moines, Iowa THE ISSUES Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss, residuals of an injury to the right eardrum, residuals of an injuries of the left arm and wrist, a gastrointestinal disability, and bilateral pes planus. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Neil Reiter, Counsel REMAND The veteran served on active duty in the Air Force from March 1953 to March 1957, and from July 1957 to April 1960. He was a member of the Army National Guard from 1963 until 1988, and was apparently also employed by the Guard in a civilian capacity during that period. On appeal, the veteran has maintained that some of the claimed disabilities were incurred in or aggravated active service. He has also contended that his claimed disabilities may have been incurred or aggravated while he was in an active or inactive duty for training status as a member of the Army National Guard. In 1995, the regional office requested that the National Personnel Records Center provide any medical records for the period that the veteran was a member of the Army National Guard. This Center replied that there were no medical records on file. However, it is noted that medical records for National Guard personnel may be kept separately, usually under the control of the State National Guard office. Furthermore, his records were also apparently reviewed at a National Guard Office in Washington DC in 1988. The Board finds that another attempt should be made to obtain any service medical records that might be available for the extended period that the veteran was a member of the Army National Guard. In addition, the Board finds that the regional office should request that the Army National Guard should clarify and certify the dates of any active duty for training periods while the veteran was a member. A review of the veteran's medical records from his periods of active duty indicates that he had occasional gastrointestinal complaints. The current record also contains a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) surgical report showing that the veteran had a repair of a hiatus hernia in October 1975. However, the complete clinical records, and, particularly, the veteran's history on admission for this period of hospitalization, have not been obtained by the regional office. The clinical history might indicate the length and severity of the hiatus hernia that was repaired, and might give an indication as to whether the veteran's gastrointestinal complaints in service were linked to the hiatus hernia repair performed in 1975. The Board finds that an attempt should be made to obtain these clinical records of his hospitalization. It is noted that where there are possible records in construction or actual possession of the VA, such records should be obtained prior to final appellate review. See Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992). The veteran has also indicated that he continues to have gastrointestinal problems as the result of his hiatus hernia. The Board believes that a special gastrointestinal examination should be conducted to determine whether there is any etiological relationship between the hiatus hernia repaired in 1975, any current disability, and any gastrointestinal complaints that occurred during service. Accordingly, the case is hereby REMANDED to the regional office for the following actions: 1. The regional office should request that the Iowa Army National Guard certify any and all active duty for training dates for the veteran while he was a member between 1963 and 1988. 2. The regional office should request that the appropriate National Guard office provide any medical records for the veteran for his period of service in the Army National Guard between 1963 and 1988. 3. The regional office should obtain copies of the complete clinical records of the veteran's hospitalization in October 1975 at a VA medical facility for hiatus hernia repair. Specifically, the veteran's admitting history and examination should be requested. 4. The regional office should schedule the veteran for a gastrointestinal examination to determine the nature and extent of any gastrointestinal disease present, including residuals of a hiatus hernia repair. All necessary tests and studies should be accomplished, and all clinical manifestations should be reported. After reviewing the veteran's records, the examiner should express an opinion concerning whether there is any etiological relationship between any gastrointestinal disease found, including residuals of a hiatus hernia repair, and any gastrointestinal complaints that were noted in service. The examiner should be requested to express an opinion concerning whether the veteran's hiatus hernia, or any other gastrointestinal disease, had its inception in service. The claims folder must be made available to the examiner prior to and during the examination. When these actions have been completed, the regional office should again review the veteran's claims for service connection. If any claim is denied, the case should be processed in accordance with appropriate appellate procedures, including the issuance of a supplemental statement of the case. No action is required of the veteran until and unless he receives further notice. The purpose of this REMAND is to procure clarifying data. The Board intimates no opinion, either legal or factual, as to the ultimate determination warranted in this case. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded to the regional office. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). ROBERT D. PHILIPP Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals 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) (1999).