Citation Nr: 18143560 Decision Date: 10/19/18 Archive Date: 10/19/18 DOCKET NO. 17-31 295 DATE: October 19, 2018 ORDER An effective date of August 9, 2013, but no earlier for right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy is granted. An effective date of August 9, 2013, but no earlier for left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to an effective date prior to August 22, 2008, for the grant of a 20 percent rating for diabetes mellitus (DM). FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran served on active duty from April 1964 to April 1966. 2. Service connection has been in effect for diabetes mellitus since April 14, 2008. 3. On August 9, 2013, the Veteran filed a claim of entitlement to an increased rating for service-connected diabetes mellitus with lay statements suggesting that he was seeking benefits for peripheral neuropathy; the peripheral neuropathy claim was referred to the RO by the Board in a January 2014 decision. 4. A June 2011 EMG reflects a disability of the peroneal and tibial nerves of the right and left lower extremities. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for an effective date of August 9, 2013, but no earlier, for the grant of a separate rating for right lower extremity neuropathy have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5110 (a) (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1, 3.156(c), 3.400, 4.119, Diagnostic Code (DC) 7913 (2018). 2. The criteria for an effective date of August 9, 2013, but no earlier, for the grant of a separate rating for left lower extremity neuropathy have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5110 (a) (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1, 3.156(c), 3.400, 4.119, DC 7913 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The assignment of effective dates is governed by 38 U.S.C. § 5110 and 38 C.F.R. § 3.400. If a claim is received within one year of a veteran’s separation from service, the effective date will be the date of separation from active duty or the date that entitlement arose. Otherwise, the effective date for an award of pension, compensation, or dependency and indemnity compensation based on an original claim, a claim reopened after final disallowance, or a claim for increase, will be the date of receipt of the claim or the date that entitlement arose, whichever is later. See 38 U.S.C. § 5110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.400. On August 9, 2013, the Veteran filed a claim for an increased rating for his service-connected DM. Service connection for DM had been in effect since April 14, 2008, with an initially assigned rating of 10 percent. In August 2013, he filed for an increased rating for DM and a 20 percent rating was granted in February 2014, effective November 10, 2009. Statements by the Veteran suggested that he was also seeking service connection and a separate rating for peripheral neuropathy. A January 2014 Board decision referred the claim to the RO for appropriate action. Since that time, in May 2016, the Veteran filed another increased rating claim for DM. In December 2016, the RO granted service connection and separate ratings for upper extremity peripheral neuropathy, and in January 2017, service connection and separate ratings for lower extremity peripheral neuropathy were also granted. The currently-assigned effective date of May 4, 2016, corresponds to the date of receipt of the claim for an increased rating for DM. DM is rated pursuant to 38 C.F.R. 4.119, DC 7913, and Note (1) to DC 7913 provides that compensable complications of diabetes are to be rated separately unless they are part of the criteria used to support a 100 percent rating under DC 7913. The Veteran appealed the effective date of the lower extremity service connection only, arguing that he was told by a physician in 2005 and 2008 that the problems he had with his legs and feet were due to nerve damage. The service connection claim for peripheral neuropathy referred in the January 2014 Board decision was still outstanding as of May 4, 2016. A June 2011 EMG revealed electrodiagnostic evidence for a diffuse peripheral neuropathy with predominant axonal and demyelinating features affecting the peroneal and tibial nerves. A November 2016 addendum to the August 2016 VA examination on which the grant of benefits was based specifically states that the peroneal and tibial nerves were affected. In light of these facts, the evidence supports a finding that the Veteran had peripheral neuropathy of the right and left lower extremities in June 2011. Thus, the date entitlement arose is June 29, 2011, the date of the EMG. However, the effective date of a claim for service connection is the date entitlement arose or the date of claim, whichever is later. Therefore, as August 9, 2013, is the date on which the Veteran filed the claim for increased benefits for DM on which the Board’s January 2014 referral of the peripheral neuropathy service connection claim was based, an effective date of August 9, 2013, is warranted but no earlier. Finally, the Veteran has not raised any other issues, nor have any other issues been reasonably raised by the record, for the Board’s consideration. See Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366, 369-370 (2017) (confirming that the Board is not required to address issues unless they are specifically raised by the claimant or reasonably raised by the evidence of record). REASONS FOR REMAND In a February 2014 rating decision, the RO granted an effective date of 20 percent for DM effective November 9, 2009. In April 2014, the Veteran appealed the decision with regard to the effective date of the 20 percent rating. In November 2015, the RO found clear and unmistakable error in the date assigned and granted an effective date of August 22, 2008, stating that the decision was a full grant of the benefit sought. However, service connection for DM was granted effective April 14, 2008, and the Veteran has repeatedly indicated that he wishes an effective date to July 2005 for his service-connected benefits for DM, including submissions in December 2015 and March 2016. Thus, the appeal of the effective date assigned in the February 2014 rating decision has not been resolved to the Veteran’s satisfaction and a statement of the case (SOC) is necessary. See Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999). The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Provide the Veteran with an SOC that addresses the issue of entitlement to an effective date prior to August 22, 2008, for the grant of a 20 percent rating for DM. Inform him that if the claim is denied, a substantive appeal must be filed in order for the Board to review the appeal of the issue. L. HOWELL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K. M. Schaefer, Counsel