Citation Nr: 1306531 Decision Date: 02/26/13 Archive Date: 03/01/13 DOCKET NO. 10-19 843 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Oakland, California THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a skin disorder, to include claimed as chloracne. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: California Department of Veterans Affairs INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active service from August 1966 to August 1968. This matter comes before the Board of Veteran's Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2008 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Oakland, California, which, inter alia, denied service connection for chloracne. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND The Veteran is seeking service connection for a skin disorder, which he identified as chloracne in his original claim for benefits. There is no evidence of any complaints of or treatment for a skin disorder in his service treatment records. In support of his claim, the Veteran submitted statements from his wife and other acquaintances who knew him before and immediately after service. These statements allege that the Veteran did not have a skin disorder prior to service but did have visible symptoms of a skin disorder at or shortly after separation. The claims file also contains an April 2010 letter from a private dermatologist, who asserts that he has treated the Veteran for skin disorders for 15 years. Nothing in the record indicates that the Veteran's skin disorder has been diagnosed as chloracne. Although an appellant who has no special medical expertise may testify as to the symptoms he can observe, he generally is not competent to provide a diagnosis that requires the application of medical expertise to the facts presented, which includes the claimant's description of history and symptomatology. Although the appellant in this case has identified his skin disability as chloracne, it cannot be a claim limited only to that diagnosis, but must rather be considered a claim for any skin disability that may reasonably be encompassed by several factors including: the claimant's description of the claim; the symptoms the claimant describes; and the information the claimant submits or that the Secretary obtains in support of the claim. Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet.App. 1, 5 (2009). Accordingly, the claim has been recharacterized as noted above. In disability compensation claims, VA must provide a VA medical examination when there is (1) competent evidence of a current disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability, (2) evidence establishing that an event, injury, or disease occurred in service or establishing certain diseases manifesting during an applicable presumptive period for which the claimant qualifies, (3) an indication that the disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability may be associated with the Veteran's service or with another service-connected disability, but (4) insufficient competent medical evidence on file for the VA to make a decision on the claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(d)(2); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4)(i). The types of evidence that "indicate" that a current disability "may be associated" with military service include, but are not limited to, 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). In this case, the Veteran's statements and those of his associates indicate that the symptoms he experiences began during or shortly after his service and have continued since then. Although there is no evidence of treatment for a skin disorder in service, the Board may not deem lay statements incredible merely because there is no corroborating medical evidence. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007). Moreover, the available post-service medical evidence confirms that the Veteran has current skin disabilities. However, there is insufficient medical evidence of record to permit VA to make a decision on the claim. Therefore, the Board finds that, in order to afford the Veteran adequate consideration of in adjudication of this appeal, the Board must remand the matter to the RO to afford him a VA examination of his claimed skin disorder. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for an appropriate VA examination to determine the nature and likely etiology of his claimed skin disorder. The claims file must be reviewed by the examiner. The examiner should conduct a thorough examination and provide a diagnosis for any pathology found. If a skin disorder is present, the examiner should offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., 50 percent or more probability) that the skin disorder began during or because of active service. A complete rationale is requested for any opinion expressed. If an opinion cannot be offered without resort to speculation, the examiner should explain why an opinion would be speculative. 2. Thereafter review the record and complete any further development, if necessary. If the claim remains denied, the RO should issue a supplemental statement of the case and afford the Veteran and his representative an opportunity to respond. The case should then be returned to the Board for appellate review. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE 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. 2012). _________________________________________________ CHERYL MASON 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) (2012).