BVA9505472 DOCKET NO. 93-13 689 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida THE ISSUE Entitlement to an increased evaluation for pulmonary tuberculosis, reinfection type, far advanced with bronchiectasis, bronchial asthma, status postoperative right upper lobectomy, currently rated 50 percent disabling. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S. L. Kennedy, Counsel REMAND The veteran served on active duty from October 1944 to December 1945. This appeal arises from a November 1990 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), St. Petersburg, Florida, Regional Office (RO). In that decision, the RO determined that the veteran's service-connected coexisting respiratory disorders, evaluated as a single disability entity, did not warrant an evaluation in excess of 50 percent. In a subsequent rating decision of September 1991, the RO determined that although service connection was in order for bronchial asthma secondary to the veteran's service-connected pulmonary tuberculosis, an evaluation in excess of 50 percent for the service-connected coexisting respiratory disorders was still not in order. The Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) observes that the medical evidence of record primarily consists of numerous VA outpatient treatment records. The Board further notes that the veteran has been receiving ongoing treatment at a VA pulmonary clinic for treatment of his various respiratory disabilities. These records include progress notes, reports of chest x-rays, and computerized tomography studies of the lungs, as well as at least one pulmonary function test. However, as the veteran's representative in this case points out, despite this documented continued treatment, the veteran has not been afforded a VA pulmonary examination in many years. The VA has a duty to assist a claimant in the development of facts pertinent to his or her claim under 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1993). The U. S. Court of Veterans Appeals has held that fulfillment of the VA's duty to assist the veteran includes providing him with a thorough and contemporaneous medical examination. Littke v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90, 92 (1990). From a review of the record, the Board has determined that the veteran should be afforded a VA examination to determine the current nature and extent of the disabilities at issue in this case. Fulfillment of the duty to assist the appellant includes the procurement and consideration of any relevant VA or other medical records. Ferraro v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 326 (1991). On remand, the RO should procure all current treatment records from facilities where the veteran has received recent treatment for symptomatology associated with his service-connected respiratory disabilities to include current treatment records from the VA medical facility in Tampa, Florida. Those records should be associated with the records assembled for appellate review. In view of the foregoing, and in order to fully and fairly adjudicate the veteran's claim, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following action: 1. The RO should request the veteran to identify all sources of current medical treatment received for respiratory difficulties. The RO should then obtain copies of the medical records from all sources he identifies (not already in the claims folder), to include records from the pulmonary clinic of the VA medical facility in Tampa, Florida, dated from July 1992 to the present. All records obtained should be added to the claims folder. 2. The RO should schedule the veteran for pulmonary examination in order to ascertain the severity of his service-connected pulmonary disabilities. The examination should be conducted in accordance with the guidelines provided in the Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations. All indicated special studies, including chest x-rays and pulmonary function tests, should be performed in order to assist the examiner in evaluating the limitation of activity imposed by the appellant's pulmonary disabilities. The report should summarize all significant positive findings, with emphasis upon the limitation of activity, to include interference with employability, imposed by the disorders. The claims folder is to be made available to the examiner prior to the examination. 3. Thereafter, the RO should readjudicate the veteran's claim. The rating should reflect consideration of the applicability of 38 C.F.R. § 3.321(b)(1). If the deter- mination remains adverse to the veteran, he should be provided a supplemental statement of the case which includes a summary of additional evidence, citation of the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.321(b)(1), and the reasons for the decision. The veteran and his representative should be afforded the applicable time to respond. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration. No action by the veteran is required until he is contacted by the RO. GARY L. GICK 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 deter- mination. 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 action has been taken in accordance with the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 303, 108 Stat. 4645, ___ (1994), and 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).