BVA9501716 DOCKET NO. 91-14 674 ) DATE ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in No. Little Rock, Arkansas THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: James W. Stanley, Jr., Attorney WITNESSES AT HEARINGS ON APPEAL The appellant and [redacted]. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD R. L. Shaw, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active military service from July 1943 to August 1944 and from July 1952 to July 1954. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 21, 1990, rating decision by the North Little Rock, Arkansas, Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) which denied service connection for the cause of the veteran's death. A July 3, 1991, decision of the Board which upheld the denial was vacated by the United States Court of Veterans Appeals (the Court) in a decision dated [citation redacted]. The appeal was thereafter remanded by the Board to the RO on March 8, 1994, for additional evidentiary development and adjudication. REMAND In an effort to obtain evidence required to determine the probative value of statements from T. J. Alston, M.D., which are favorable to the appellant's claim, the Board remanded the case in March 1994 to obtain all available medical records from Dr. Alston pertaining to the veteran. Similar information was to be requested from two other physicians who had examined or treated the veteran as well as from any other physicians whom the appellant might identify. A letter dated on March 28, 1994, was mailed to the appellant's attorney requesting authorization to contact the physicians specified and soliciting information concerning any others who might be contacted. No reply was received from either party and the case was returned to the Board. Since the Board is precluded from exercising its own medical judgment in deciding appeals, Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 171 (1991), an additional opinion addressing the medical issues raised in this appeal should be obtained. Before the opinion is requested, a second attempt to obtain the records requested in the previous remand should be undertaken; Dr. Alston should be offered an opportunity to clarify or supplement his prior comments in light of the discussion above. After receipt of any additional material, the file should be referred for an examination by a specialist in pulmonary diseases. In view of the foregoing, the case is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. The RO should make an additional attempt to obtain the records requested in the Board remand of March 8, 1994. Dr. Alston, in particular, should be given an opportunity to supplement his prior statements with medical evidence and provide appropriate references to medical literature claimed to support his stated opinions. 2. Upon receipt of any additional material, or if no reply is received, the record should be referred to a specialist in pulmonary diseases. On the basis of a thorough review of the entire record, the pulmonary specialist should be asked to express definite conclusions with respect to the following matters: (1) What is the medical probability that the veteran's service-connected degenerative arthritis caused or played a role in the development of the fatal pneumonia; (2) What is the medical probability that the service- connected arthritis contributed materially or substantially in producing the veteran's death or was productive of such debilitation or general impairment of health as to materially reduce the veteran's ability to withstand the effects of pneumonia or other disease; and (3) What is the medical probability that the service-connected degenerative arthritis materially hastened or accelerated the veteran's demise. The rationale for the stated conclusions should be set forth in full, with reference to supporting documentation. 3. Following completion of the foregoing, the RO should review the issue on appeal. If the decision remains adverse to the appellant, a statement of the case should be prepared and she and her attorney should be given a reasonable period of time for reply. Thereafter, the claim should be returned to the Board for further review. No action is required of the appellant until she receives further notice. The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional information. The Board does not intimate any factual or legal conclusions as to the outcome ultimately warranted in this appeal. STEPHEN L. WILKINS 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).