BVA9501134 DOCKET NO. 92-00235 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Denver, Colorado THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for a chronic bilateral hip disorder. 2. Entitlement to an increased (compensable) disability evaluation for tension and migraine headaches. 3. Entitlement to an increased (compensable) disability evaluation for sinusitis. 4. Entitlement to an increased (compensable) disability evaluation for lumbosacral strain. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J.W. Engle, Counsel INTRODUCTION The appellant served on active duty from December 1982 to November 1989. This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (the Board) on appeal from a decision dated in August 1990 by the Denver, Colorado, Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office (VARO). CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL The appellant contends a chronic bilateral hip disorder had its onset during her period of active duty. She further argues that her service-connected headaches, sinusitis and lumbosacral strain warrant compensable disability evaluations. DECISION OF THE BOARD The Board, in accordance with the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104 (West 1991), has reviewed and considered all of the evidence and material of record in the veteran's claims file. Based on its review of the relevant evidence in this matter, and for the following reasons and bases, it is the decision of the Board that the appellant's claim to service connection for a bilateral hip disorder and entitlement to increased disability evaluations for headaches, sinusitis and lumbosacral strain should be denied based upon the appellant's failure to report for the VA examination scheduled in August 1994. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Pursuant to the Board's remand decision dated in December 1993, the appellant was scheduled for a VA examination on August 2, 1994. 2. The record reflects that the notice of examination was sent to the appellant at P.O. Box 475, Denver Colorado, 80201, the latest address of record. 3. The appellant failed to report for the August 1994 examination. 4. There is no evidence of record of "good cause" which would excuse the appellant's failure to report for the VA examination which was scheduled in August 1994. CONCLUSION OF LAW The appellant's claim for service connection for a bilateral hip disorder and claims to entitlement to increased disability evaluations for headaches, sinusitis and lumbosacral strain are denied due to her failure to report, without good cause, for the VA examination scheduled in August 1994. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1(q), 3.655(b) (1993). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The record reflects that the Board remanded this case in December 1993 for additional evidentiary development. Pursuant to the Board's remand, VARO was specifically instructed to schedule the appellant for a VA examination in order to address inadequacies found in the April 1990, VA examination including the vague nature of the diagnosis regarding the appellant's hips and the examiner's apparent lack of access to the appellant's claimsfolder. In addition to the VA examination, the appellant was requested to provide additional information with supporting documentation regarding the frequency and duration of her service-connected headaches. Finally, it was noted that the appellant had previously indicated that additional treatment reports from Dr. Visentin were available. Accordingly, a release from the appellant was requested in order to obtain those treatment reports. Further review of the record reveals that several attempts to contact the appellant at the 60 South Albion St., Denver Colorado, 80222 address by VARO in December 1993 and January 1994 were unsuccessful as both letters were returned and it was indicated that the forwarding order had expired. The record further reflects that a new mailing address for the appellant was obtained, specifically, P.O Box 475, Denver, Colorado, 80201. In July 1994 the Denver, Colorado VA Medical Center (VAMC) sent notification to the appellant at the above P.O. Box address regarding the scheduling of a VA examination on August 2, 1994. Unfortunately, the appellant failed to report for that examination and a subsequent letter from the VAMC dated on August 15, 1994, was returned by the United States Postal Service indicating that the addressee was unknown. In addition, the appellant's representative has reported in the Informal Presentation dated in December 1994, that they have been unable to contact the appellant. There is no additional evidence of record to establish that the appellant has made any efforts to contact either VA or her representative to update her address. While the VA does have a duty to assist the veteran (appellant) in the development of his claim, that duty is not limitless. In the normal course of events, it is the burden of the veteran (appellant) to keep the VA apprised of his whereabouts. If she does not do so, there is no burden on the VA to "turn up heaven and earth" to find her. Hyson v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 262 (1993). The Board notes that under VA regulations, it is incumbent upon the veteran to submit to a VA examination if he or she is applying for, or in receipt of, compensation. Dusek v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 519(1992). When the examination was scheduled in conjunction with any other original claim, a reopened claim for a benefit which was previously disallowed, or a claim for increase, the claim shall be denied. 38 C.F.R. § 3.655(b) (1993) (emphasis added). In this case, there is no evidence of record explaining the circumstances surrounding the appellant's failure to report for the August 1994 VA examination. Furthermore, there is no evidence of "good cause" for her failure to report. The Board notes that the August 1994 VA examination was specifically scheduled to assist the appellant in the development and adjudication of her claims now presented on appeal. Moreover, there is no evidence of record which suggests that she has notified VA that her mailing address for the purposes of receipt of VA correspondence has changed since the Board remanded this case in December 1993. In view of the above, and in accordance with the regulatory provisions set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.655(b) (1993), the appellant's claims for entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hip disorder and entitlement to increased disability evaluations for headaches, sinusitis and lumbosacral strain shall be denied. ORDER The appellant's claims seeking entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hip disorder and entitlement to increased disability evaluations for headaches, sinusitis and lumbosacral strain are denied. C.P. RUSSELL 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. NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7266 (West 1991), a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals granting less than the complete benefit, or benefits, sought on appeal is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals within 120 days from the date of mailing of notice of the decision, provided that a Notice of Disagreement concerning an issue which was before the Board was filed with the agency of original jurisdiction on or after November 18, 1988. Veterans' Judicial Review Act, Pub. L. No. 100-687, § 402 (1988). The date which appears on the face of this decision constitutes the date of mailing and the copy of this decision which you have received is your notice of the action taken on your appeal by the Board of Veterans' Appeals.