Citation NR: 9722899	
Decision Date: 06/30/97		Archive Date: 07/02/97
DOCKET NO.  96-51 766	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in 
Albuquerque, New Mexico


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for a skin condition, 
claimed secondary to exposure to Agent Orange.


REPRESENTATION

Veteran represented by:	Disabled American Veterans


WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

The veteran


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

K. Conner, Associate Counsel



INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active service from February 1964 to February 
1966.  This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals 
(Board) from an October 1995 rating decision of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Albuquerque Regional 
Office (RO) which denied his claim of service connection for 
a skin condition, claimed secondary to exposure to Agent 
Orange in service.  In May 1996, he testified at a travel 
board hearing at the RO.  


REMAND

At his May 1997 hearing, the veteran testified that he was 
exposed to Agent Orange during his tour of duty in Vietnam, 
especially while participating in Operation Ranch Hand.  His 
service personnel records confirm that he served in Vietnam.  
As such, exposure to herbicides is presumed.  See 38 C.F.R. § 
3.307(a)(6)(iii) (1996).  

The veteran testified that approximately one month after 
arriving in Vietnam, he developed a rash over portions of his 
body, including his underarms, neck, groin, feet, and hands, 
appearing as little blisters and bumps which initially bled 
and then scabbed.  The initial rash reportedly lasted for 
several weeks and then reappeared intermittently during 
service, although he only sought treatment on one occasion in 
October 1965.  His available service medical records are 
negative for complaints or findings pertaining to the skin; 
however, it appears that the service medical records are 
incomplete as there is no separation examination report of 
record; in June 1968, the National Personnel Records Center 
indicated that an extensive search failed to locate 
additional service medical records pertaining to the veteran.  

Post service, the veteran stated that his skin condition 
continued to reoccur on an intermittent basis.  He was first 
treated approximately 4-5 months after service separation by 
Dr. Ferrel, a physician affiliated with St. Joseph’s Hospital 
in Albuquerque, who reportedly treated him on several 
occasions, prescribing pills and a topical ointment for his 
skin condition.  The veteran also testified that he was 
examined by several doctors for a skin condition at the 
University of New Mexico Hospital approximately two years 
ago.  Treatment records from the Dr. Ferrel and the 
University of New Mexico Hospital are not of record.  Given 
the nature of the veteran’s claim and the fact that service 
medical records appear to be incomplete, the Board is of the 
opinion that the RO should attempt to obtain these records.

In addition, the veteran testified that he is currently 
treated on a regular basis at the VA Medical Center (MC) in 
Albuquerque, most recently in March 1997.  VA outpatient 
treatment records for the period of February 1993 to June 
1996 are of record and indicate that the veteran’s current 
skin condition has been variously diagnosed as tinea pedis 
with onychomycosis and warts, lichen planus, hypertrophic 
actinic keratosis and psoriasis.  The RO should obtain copies 
of recent VA treatment records.  See Bell v. Derwinski, 2 
Vet.App. 611, 612-613 (1992).

Under the circumstances, the case is remanded for the 
following action:

1.  The RO should contact the VAMC in 
Albuquerque and secure copies of all 
treatment records pertaining to the 
veteran from June 1996 to the present.  

2.  The RO should contact the veteran and 
request that he provide the location and 
approximate dates of all medical 
treatment, VA or private, he has received 
since his separation from service.  After 
obtaining the necessary authorization for 
the release of information, the RO should 
secure copies of all treatment records 
from any health care provider noted by 
the veteran; of particular interest are 
treatment records from Dr. Ferrel and the 
University of New Mexico.  

3.  The veteran should then be afforded a 
VA dermatology examination to determine 
the nature and etiology of any current 
skin disorder.  The claims folder must be 
made available for review by the examiner 
in conjunction with the examination.  All 
necessary tests and studies should be 
conducted, and all findings reported 
legibly and in detail.  The examiner is 
requested to provide an opinion as to the 
etiology and likely date of onset of any 
skin abnormality found on examination, to 
include whether it is at least as likely 
as not that any skin condition found on 
examination is related to the veteran’s 
service or any incident therein, 
including exposure to Agent Orange.  The 
examiner should be asked to provide the 
reasons for any conclusions reached.

Thereafter, the case should be reviewed by the RO.  If the 
benefit sought on appeal is not granted, the veteran and his 
representative should be provided a supplemental statement of 
the case, and an opportunity to respond.  The case should 
then be returned to the Board for further review.



		
	J.F. GOUGH
	Member, Board of Veterans’ Appeals

38 U.S.C.A. § 7102 (West Supp. 1996) 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) 
(1996).
- 2 -