Citation Nr: 1305989 Decision Date: 02/21/13 Archive Date: 02/27/13 DOCKET NO. 10-45 131 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Boise, Idaho THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a skin disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL The Veteran and his wife ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD W.T. Snyder, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from February 1969 to December 1970. This appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) arose from a November 2009 rating decision by the Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in Boise, Idaho, that denied the benefit sought on appeal. In November 2011, the Veteran appeared at a Board hearing via video conference with the Veteran sitting at the local RO, and the undersigned sitting at the Board's Central Office in Washington, DC. A copy of the transcript is in the claims file and has been reviewed. 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. The Veteran also has a Virtual VA paperless claims file, which is a highly secured electronic repository that is used to store and review documents involved in the claims process. The Board has reviewed the contents of the paperless file, and there are currently no pertinent records in the paper claims file. Any further development or adjudication of this matter should take into account this paperless claims file. REMAND VA is obliged to provide an examination or obtain a medical opinion when the record contains competent evidence that the claimant has a current disability or signs and symptoms of a current disability, the record indicates that the disability or signs and symptoms of disability may be associated with active service; and the record does not contain sufficient information to make a decision on the claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(d) (West 2002); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). The types of evidence that indicate that a current disability may be associated with military service include, but are not limited to, medical evidence that suggests a nexus but is too equivocal or lacking in specificity to support a decision on the merits, or credible evidence of continuity of symptomatology such as pain or other symptoms capable of lay observation. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83 (2006). The threshold for finding a link between current disability and service is low. Locklear v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 410 (2006); McLendon v. Nicholson, at 83. The Veteran asserts his skin disorder, variously diagnosed as atopic dermatitis and atopic eczema, is a result of his in-service work with diesel fuel without gloves or other protection. He testified he once sought treatment in service and was prescribed a cream. Service treatment records do not include findings related to a skin disease. The Veteran did note a history of boils on his Report of Medical History at service separation, but he reported that this occurred when he was age 10. The November 1970 Report Of Medical Examination For Separation reflects the skin was assessed as normal. In an October 2009 statement the Veteran asserts he had experienced skin symptoms since the date of his separation from active service. He testified at the hearing that his symptoms had their onset approximately 30 years prior to the hearing, see Transcript, p. 6, which would have been 1981. He submitted general literature on skin rashes that reported that health problems from solvents, including diesel fuel, could have a delayed onset following exposure. The Veteran has not yet had a VA examination. The record contains competent evidence of a current disability and the evidence indicates that this disability might be related to service. The Veteran's testimony about his in-service working conditions, statements from fellow service members, and the general literature on the potential causal relationship, including delayed impact, between skin rashes and diesel fuel satisfies the low threshold for an examination, as there is insufficient evidence to otherwise decide the claim. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4) (2012). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AMC/RO should arrange for a VA examination to determine whether the Veteran has any current skin disease that is the result of in-service exposure to solvents. The claims file must be provided for review by the examiner as part of the examination. The examiner should opine as to whether there is at least a 50-percent probability the Veteran's currently diagnosed skin disorder (any such disorder shown since February 2009) is causally related to his reported in-service, exposure to solvents, including diesel fuel. The examiner should provide reasons for this opinion. The explanation should include comment on the general literature in the claims file. The examiner is advised that the Veteran's lay testimony on his in-service working conditions, symptoms and history is competent evidence that must be considered and discussed. The absence of supporting clinical records is not, by itself a sufficient reason for rejecting the Veteran's reports. 3. Thereafter, the AMC/RO must review the claims file and ensure that the foregoing development actions, as well as any other development that may be in order, has been conducted and completed in full. 4. If the decision remains in any way adverse to the Veteran, issue a Supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). The case should thereafter be returned to the Board, if in order. The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome of this case. The Veteran need take no action unless otherwise notified. VA will notify him if further action is required on his part. He 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. 2010). _________________________________________________ Mark D. Hindin 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) (2010).