Citation Nr: 1313719 Decision Date: 04/24/13 Archive Date: 05/03/13 DOCKET NO. 07-18 400 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Jackson, Mississippi THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a skin disorder, to include as a qualifying chronic disability under 38 C.F.R. § 3.317. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD L. Edwards, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active service from November 1990 to May 1991 and from October 1991 to April 1992. His service included duty in Southwest Asia from January 1991 to May 1991. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2006 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Regional Office (RO), in Jackson, Mississippi. In March 2011, the Board determined that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen a previously denied claim of entitlement to service connection for a skin disorder, to include as a qualifying chronic disability under 38 C.F.R. § 3.317. The Veteran appealed the Board's March 2011 decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a February 2012 Order, the Court granted the parties' Joint Motion to Vacate and Remand the Board's decision for readjudication consistent with the directives contained therein. This claim was remanded in July 2012 to obtain additional medical records and afford the Veteran a VA examination. Unfortunately, the appeal is again REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the Veteran if further action is required. REMAND The Veteran seeks entitlement to service connection for a skin disorder, to include as a qualifying chronic disability under 38 C.F.R. § 3.317. In the July 2012 Remand, the RO was instructed to afford the Veteran a VA examination. The Veteran was scheduled for an examination and was notified in September 2012. The Veteran failed to report to the scheduled VA examination. In a March 2013 Written Brief Presentation, the Veteran's representative stated the Veteran was unable to report for the examination due to reasons beyond the Veteran's control, and has asked the Board to reschedule the Veteran for another examination. The Board finds a Remand is necessary to afford the Veteran another opportunity to attend a VA examination. The Veteran is reminded that he is expected to attend scheduled examinations or give proper notice in the event of cancellation. VA has a duty to assist the Veteran in obtaining information, and the Veteran has a duty on his part to cooperate with VA in developing a claim. See Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991) (noting that "[t]he duty to assist is not always a one-way street"). VA's duty must be understood as a duty to assist the Veteran in developing his claim, rather than a duty on the part of VA to develop the entire claim with the Veteran performing a passive role. Turk v. Peake, 21 Vet. App. 565, 568 (2008). In this instance, the Veteran must aid in the development of his claim by attending the VA examination as requested. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. The RO/AMC shall obtain and associate with the claims file all updated treatment records. 2. The RO/AMC shall schedule the Veteran for a VA skin examination by an appropriately qualified physician. The examiner must review the claims file and state that the claims file was reviewed in the report. Current VA Gulf War Examination Guidelines must be followed. All indicated tests should be performed, and all findings reported in detail. The physician shall be requested to prepare an opinion supported by a rationale on the following: (a) Whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran currently has or has had at any time during the pendency of the claim a skin (dermatological) disorder due to or as a result of an injury or disease incurred in service; (b) Whether the Veteran has an unexplained skin (dermatological) disorder due to an undiagnosed illness or a medically unexplained multisymptom illness. In doing so, the examiner must acknowledge the Veteran's competent reports as to the onset and continuity of symptomatology. If the examiner rejects the Veteran's reports of symptomatology, he or she must provide a reason for doing so. The examiner shall identify and explain the relevance or significance, as appropriate, of any history, clinical findings, medical knowledge or literature, etc., relied upon in reaching a conclusion. The absence of evidence of treatment for a skin disorder in the Veteran's service treatment records cannot, standing alone, serve as the basis for a negative opinion. If an opinion cannot be expressed without resort to speculation, the physician must so indicate and discuss why an opinion is not possible. 4. The Veteran is hereby notified that it is his responsibility to report for the examinations scheduled in connection with this REMAND and to cooperate in the development of his case. 5. The RO/AMC will then review the Veteran's claims file and ensure that the foregoing development actions have been completed in full, and no other notification or development action, in addition to those directed above, is required. If further action is required, it shall be undertaken prior to further claim adjudication. 6. The RO/AMC will then readjudicate the Veteran's claim. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran and his representative shall be provided with a Supplemental Statement of the Case. An appropriate period of time shall be allowed for response. Thereafter, if appropriate, the case is to be returned to the Board, following applicable appellate procedure. The Veteran need take no action until he is so informed. 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). The purposes of this remand are to obtain additional information and comply with all due process considerations. No inference should be drawn regarding the final disposition of this claim as a result of this action. This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. Claims 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). _________________________________________________ DEMETRIOS G. ORFANOUDIS Acting 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).