Citation Nr: 0533969 Decision Date: 12/16/05 Archive Date: 12/30/05 DOCKET NO. 05-01 774 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Detroit, Michigan THE ISSUE Entitlement to an increase rating for tinea pedis, currently rated as 10 percent disabling. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Military Order of the Purple Heart of the U.S.A. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Jon M. Jeffreys, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty with the United States Marine Corps from July 1965 to June 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2004 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Detroit, Michigan, which denied the benefit sought on appeal. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the veteran if further action is required on his part. REMAND The veteran contends that the severity of his tinea pedis and the type of treatment he has received qualifies him for a higher disability rating. Under 38 C.F.R. § 4.118, Diagnostic Code 7806, an evaluation of 30 percent is warranted if the record shows: dermatitis or eczema involving 20 to 40 percent of the entire body or 20 to 40 percent of exposed areas affected, or; systemic therapy such as corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs required for a total duration of six weeks or more, but not constantly, during the past 12-month period. An evaluation of 60 percent is warranted if the record shows: more than 40 percent of the entire body or more than 40 percent of exposed areas affected, or; constant or near-constant systemic therapy such as corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs required during the past 12-month period. It is presumed that the veteran is seeking the maximum benefit allowed by law and regulation. AB v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 35, 38 (1993). A review of the claims folder shows that the veteran has received extensive treatment at VA and private facilities for his tinea pedis. The treatment records show that the veteran's treatment has ranged from wearing special socks to being prescribed a variety of medications, to include Nizoral and Carmol, but there is no clear indication whether any of these medications are corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs and, if so, the prescribed frequency of their use. Although the veteran has been afforded VA examinations to assess the current severity of his disability, the Board finds the current VA examination that is of record is insufficient to render a decision on this claim. When the veteran was examined by the VA in August 2002, it was noted he had tinea pedis, but there is nothing in the report that indicates the frequency with which the veteran has been treated with corticosteroids and such information is critical for a proper application of the rating criteria. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.118, Diagnostic Code 7806. Although there is a great deal of evidence in the claims folder, the Board is unable to make a clear determination as to whether the veteran's level of disability warrants an increased rating because the evidence of record does not adequately address the rating criteria. Accordingly, further appellate consideration will be deferred and this case is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. The RO should request the veteran to provide the contact information of any VA or private physicians that have treated him since the June 2004 BVA decision. The RO should obtain any records associated with this treatment. 2. Thereafter, the RO should make arrangements with the appropriate VA medical facility for the veteran to be afforded a VA examination to determine the nature, extent, and etiology of the veteran's tinea pedis. The claims folder must be made available to, and reviewed by, the examiner in conjunction with the examination, and the examination report should reflect that such a review was made. All pertinent pathology of the service connected tinea pedis, which is found on examination, should be noted in the report of the evaluation. Further, the examiner should express an opinion as to whether the veteran's tinea pedis has been treated with corticosteroids or immunosuppressive drugs, and if so, the frequency with which the drug was given to the veteran. Specifically, the examiner should state whether either Nizoral or Carmol, drugs mentioned in the treatment records, is a corticosteroid or other immunosuppressive drug. A complete rationale for all opinions should be provided. 3. The RO should then adjudicate the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for tinea pedis. If the decision remains in any way adverse to the veteran, he and his representative should be provided with a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). The SSOC must contain notice of all relevant actions taken on the claim for benefits, to include applicable law and regulations considered pertinent to the issue currently on appeal. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board, if in order. No action is required of the veteran until he is notified by the RO. However, the veteran is hereby notified that failure to report for any scheduled VA examination(s) without good cause shown may adversely affect the outcome of his claim for an increased rating for tinea pedis, and may result in a denial of this claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (2005). The veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2005). _________________________________________________ KATHLEEN K. GALLAGHER Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. 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) (2005).