BVA9505706 DOCKET NO. 93-03 066 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Cleveland, Ohio THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a dental disability. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Keith W. Allen, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from January 1953 to January 1956. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Cleveland, Ohio denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a dental disability in an October 1991 dental rating action. The veteran appealed that decision to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board). He was scheduled to testify at a November 1992 hearing before a traveling member of the Board, but he failed to appear. He has represented himself throughout the course of his appeal. The Board notes that an additional claim for service connection for an eye condition (defective vision) was denied by the RO in an August 1991 decision. The veteran was notified of that decision in September 1991. He submitted a notice of disagreement with respect to this issue in October 1991, but after he was sent supplemental statements of the case, in May and December 1992, he did not submit his substantive appeal after the supplemental statements of the case were issued. Therefore, the only issue perfected for appellate review is his dental claim. REMAND The veteran's claim is well-grounded within the meaning of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). That is, he has presented a claim which is not inherently implausible. However, the Board believes the case must be remanded since further action is required by VA in order to comply with its duty to assist him in developing evidence pertinent to this claim. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.103, 3.159. The duty to assist includes the obligation to secure all relevant medical records, and, when indicated by the circumstances of the case, ordering a dental examination. Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 78 (1990); Littke v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90 (1990). The only service medical record currently on file is the report from the veteran's January 1956 separation examination. It shows that he was missing two teeth (numbers 3 and 14) when examined at that time, but there is no indication whether these teeth were extracted or knocked out during service, or if they were already missing when he entered service. The report additionally notes that several of his other teeth were carious but restorable. In August 1991 correspondence, officials at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) sent a folder to the RO which contained only the report from the veteran's service separation examination. As mentioned earlier, this is the extent of the available service medical records. Officials at the NPRC did not, however, indicate whether the veteran's other service medical records have been lost or destroyed, and they did not include his service dental records with their correspondence. Another search for the service medical and dental records should be conducted. Indeed, when the RO denied the claim previously, it was specifically noted that the decision was based on incomplete service medical records. In his July 1991 application for VA compensation benefits, the veteran claimed that he received dental treatment during service from 1954 to 1955, consisting of extractions and restoration of carious teeth. He also reported that he was treated after service, twice a month, by a private dentist. Later in July 1991, after being asked by the RO to submit additional information concerning his claim, he listed several other sources of post-service treatment for dental-related problems. See VA Form 21-4142, received at the RO on July 22, 1991. However, there is no indication in the claims folder that the RO ever requested the records of this alleged treatment. Despite the fact that personnel at the VA medical center in Toledo, Ohio reported in August 1991 correspondence that the veteran had not been treated in the dental clinic there, an attempt should be made to obtain the records of the other treatment that he alleges he received after service. With respect to the veteran's application for VA compensation benefits, it should be noted parenthetically that treatable carious teeth or replaceable missing teeth are not considered by VA to be disabling conditions and, therefore, may only be service-connected for the purpose of receiving treatment (i.e., not compensation). See 38 C.F.R. § 4.149 (1994). To receive treatment, the veteran must allege that he meets one of the eligibility categories listed in 38 U.S.C.A. § 1712 (West 1991) and 38 C.F.R. § 17.123 (1994). This legal and regulatory authority provides entitlement to VA outpatient treatment when a veteran sustained dental trauma during service, was a prisoner of war, has a dental condition that is aggravating a service- connected disability, etc. Since clarification of this matter is necessary, the veteran should be asked to identify the basis on which he is seeking entitlement to VA dental benefits. The veteran's teeth have not been examined by VA. This is necessary to determine whether he currently has a dental disability and, if so, whether it is etiologically related to an incident of service. See Rabideau v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 141 (1992). To ensure that VA has met its duty to assist the veteran in developing the facts pertinent to his claim and to ensure full compliance with due process requirements, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following development: 1. The RO should contact the NPRC and ask officials there to forward any additional service medical and dental records that might be on file concerning the veteran. If no additional records are available, having been lost or destroyed, this should be definitively stated in writing; or, if there is some other explanation for the absence of the veteran's complete service medical and dental records, it should be identified. 2. The RO should ask the veteran to submit a list (containing the complete names, addresses, and dates) of all sources (VA, private, or other) of treatment that he has received for dental-related problems since service. The list should include, but is not limited to, sources he previously identified in his application for VA compensation benefits (received at the RO in July 1991) and those he listed on VA Form 21-4142 (also received in July 1991). After securing the necessary release forms, the RO should contact these sources directly to obtain any relevant records, following the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. 3. The veteran should be asked to identify the basis on which he is seeking entitlement to VA dental benefits (for example, based on having sustained dental trauma in service, prisoner of war status, etc.). 4. The veteran should be afforded a VA dental examination to determine if he currently has a dental disability and, if so, whether it is etiologically related to service. The claims folder must be made available to the examiner for review prior to the examination. All findings should be reported in detail and the bases for any conclusions drawn should be explained. Thereafter, the case should be reviewed by the RO. If any benefit sought is denied, the veteran should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and given an opportunity to respond, after which the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration. M. CHEEK 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).