Citation Nr: 18140506 Decision Date: 10/03/18 Archive Date: 10/03/18 DOCKET NO. 16-28 145 DATE: October 3, 2018 ORDER 1. Entitlement to an initial compensable disability rating for chloracne is denied. REMANDED 2. Entitlement to an effective date prior to April 18, 2012, for the grant of service connection for chloracne is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s chloracne disability has not manifested with deep acne (deep inflamed nodules and pus-filled cysts) affecting less than 40 percent of the neck and face, or; deep acne other than on the face and neck during the appeal. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to an initial compensable disability rating for chloracne have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1-4.14, 4.118, Diagnostic Code (DC) 7829 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active duty service from June 1970 to March 1972. The Veteran contends that the disability rating assigned for his chloracne disability should be rated higher than the currently-assigned disability rating. VA has adopted a Schedule for Rating Disabilities (Schedule) to evaluate service-connected disabilities. See 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R., Part IV. Disability evaluations assess the ability of the body as a whole, the psyche, or a body system or organ to function under the ordinary conditions of daily life, to include employment. 38 C.F.R. § 4.10. The percentage ratings in the Schedule represent the average impairment in earning capacity resulting from service-connected diseases and injuries and their residual conditions in civilian occupations. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. The percentage ratings are generally adequate to compensate for considerable loss of working time from exacerbation or illness proportionate to the severity of the disability. Id. In disability rating cases, VA assesses the level of disability from the initial grant of service connection or a year prior to the date of application for an increased rating and determines whether the level of disability warrants the assignment of different disability ratings at different times over the course of the claim, a practice known as “staged ratings.” The Veteran appealed the initially-assigned disability rating for his chloracne disability; thus, the appeal period stems from April 18, 2012. When all the evidence is assembled, the Board is then responsible for determining whether the evidence supports the claim or is in relative equipoise, with the Veteran prevailing in either event, or whether the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, in which case the claim is denied. When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall resolve reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 4.3 (2017). In deciding claims, it is the Board’s responsibility to evaluate the entire record on appeal. See 38 U.S.C. § 7104(a) (2012). Although the Board has an obligation to provide reasons and bases supporting this decision, there is no need to discuss each and every piece of evidence submitted by the Veteran or on his behalf. See Gonzales v. West, 218 F.3d 1378, 1380-81 (Fed. Cir. 2000). Rather, the Board’s analysis below will focus specifically on what evidence is needed to substantiate the claim and what the evidence in the claims file shows, or fails to show, with respect to the claim. See Timberlake v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 122, 128-30 (2000). The Veteran’s disability has been rated as noncompensable (zero percent) under 38 C.F.R. § 4.118, DC 7829, which rates symptoms of chloracne. Under DC 7829, a noncompensable rating is applicable for superficial acne (comedones, papules, pustules, superficial cysts) of any extent. A 10 percent evaluation is assigned for deep acne (deep inflamed nodules and pus-filled cysts) affecting less than 40 percent of the face and neck, or; deep acne other than on the face and neck. A 30 percent evaluation is assigned for deep acne (deep inflamed nodules and pus-filled cysts) affecting 40 percent or more of the face and neck. The 30 percent rating is the maximum schedular rating allowable under DC 7829; however, this DC permits chloracne to be rated as disfigurement of the head, face or neck (DC 7800) or scars (DCs 7801, 7802, 7803, 7804, or 7805), if this is the predominant disability. 38 C.F.R. § 4.118, DC 7829. The Veteran filed a claim for service connection for chloracne in April 2012. He submitted many pages of private progress notes, which pertain to his chloracne symptoms from 2006 and earlier. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in May 2013, which showed that he was diagnosed with chloracne. The Veteran reported that he worked in the landscaping business for 37 years following his separation from active duty service, which included working with various chemicals and excessive exposure to the sun. The Veteran indicated that he first sought treatment for his skin disability in 1980, or approximately eight years following service. The examiner noted that the Veteran’s chloracne disability did not cause scarring or disfigurement of the head, face, or neck, but the Veteran did have benign or malignant neoplasms. The Veteran did not report any treatment, including oral or topical medications, in the previous year, and he did not have any debilitating or non-debilitating episodes in the previous year related to his chloracne. A physical examination showed that the Veteran had superficial acne (comedones, papules, pustules, or superficial cysts) of any extent that affected body areas other than his face and neck. The examiner determined that the chloracne did not impact his ability to work. In his October 2013 notice of disagreement (NOD), the Veteran contended that he had endured skin-related symptoms for over 40 years and he wanted a 40 percent disability rating for his chloracne. In his June 2016 substantive appeal to the Board (VA Form 9), he asserted that he had never had problems with his skin prior to being deployed to the Republic of Vietnam during active duty service. Additionally, the Veteran’s representative also contended that the Veteran’s chloracne should be rated as compensable due to the severity of the disability in a May 2018 statement. Given this evidence, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that Veteran’s chloracne disability has been manifested with deep acne (deep inflamed nodules and pus-filled cysts) affecting less than 40 percent of the neck and face, or; deep acne other than on the face and neck during the appeal. Specifically, the May 2013 VA examination report shows that this service-connected disability manifested with superficial acne (comedones, papules, pustules, or superficial cysts) of any extent that affected body areas other than his face and neck, and that the Veteran did not have any scarring or disfigurement of the head, face, or neck. The private medical records submitted by the Veteran do not show symptoms more severe than what was described in the May 2013 examination report. These symptoms amount to no more than a noncompensable disability rating for chloracne. Thus, an initial compensable disability rating is not warranted during the appeal. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.118, DC 7829. Accordingly, as the preponderance of the evidence is against the Veteran’s claim, the benefit of the doubt doctrine does not apply, and the claim must be denied. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 4.3. REASONS FOR REMAND The Board must remand the Veteran’s claim for an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for chloracne for additional procedural development. Specifically, in the October 2013 NOD, the Veteran disagreed with the Regional Office’s (RO’s) assigned of an effective date of April 18, 2012, for the grant of service connection in the September 2013 rating decision, as well as the disability rating assigned for this disability. While the RO issued a statement of case (SOC) for the increased rating claim in April 2016, it did not issue an SOC for the earlier effective date claim. To date, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) has not issued an SOC addressing the claim of entitlement to an effective date prior to April 18, 2012, for the grant of service connection for chloracne. Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999). Accordingly, this matter is remanded for the AOJ to rectify this procedural deficiency. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Issue an SOC addressing the claim of entitlement to an effective date prior to April 18, 2012, for the grant of service connection for chloracne. Only if the Veteran perfects an appeal by submitting a timely VA Form 9, Appeal to the Board, should the issue be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration.   A. P. SIMPSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. Hodzic, Counsel