Citation Nr: 18148897 Decision Date: 11/08/18 Archive Date: 11/08/18 DOCKET NO. 06-20 216 DATE: November 8, 2018 REMANDED The appeal for entitlement to service connection for an eye disorder manifested by increased intraocular pressure is remanded. The appeal for entitlement to service connection for dental residuals of full mouth rehabilitation is remanded. The appeal for entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 40 percent for low back strain is remanded. The appeal for a compensable disability rating for recurrent uveitis is remanded. The appeal for a separate disability rating for residuals of cholecystectomy is remanded. The appeal for a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for gastro-esophageal reflux disease with hiatal hernia, residuals of cholecystectomy, and a history of gastritis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from November 1993 to September 2000. She provided sworn testimony in support of her appeal issues during a May 2005 hearing at the RO before a Decision Review Officer. The Board remanded the issues addressed herein in February 2011. The February 2011 Board remand included orders for updating treatment records; and providing VA examinations for the purpose of identifying medical nexus to service in the case of the service connection appeals, and to identify current disability levels with regard to the Veteran’s increased rating appeals. The Board also ordered the issuance of a Statement of the Case pertaining to two outstanding claims for service connection. Review of the Veteran’s claims file shows that the RO accomplished these actions to the extent possible although they were hampered by a lack of cooperation from the Veteran, as she failed to respond to multiple letters from VA, and failed to report for multiple scheduled VA examinations, with no attempt to show good cause for her failures, as provided by 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.158, 3.655. The Veteran last communicated with VA regarding her benefits appeal in September 2012, when she reported for a VA examination in Pensacola Florida. She has not contacted the VA’s Compensation service or the Board since that time. She does apparently continue to receive VA medical care, however, as shown by several reports of hospitalizations which have been included in her claims file. Importantly, the Veteran has not provided a current address to VA for many years. It is her responsibility as a VA beneficiary and recipient of VA benefits to keep VA apprised of her whereabouts. Her accredited representative likewise has not heard from her for many years, and asserts that she most likely has not received any of the correspondence VA has mailed to her pertaining to her appeal, to include the notices of VA medical examinations scheduled to comply with the Board’s 2011 remand. The Veteran has been in receipt of a 100 percent combined disability rating along with special monthly compensation since her discharge from service in September 2000. Thus, one reasonable interpretation of the facts of this case is that she no longer wishes to pursue this appeal. Her inaction on her own appeal over the past six years would certainly appear to indicate a lack of interest on her part. IF in fact, she is wholly satisfied with the current award of 100 percent plus special monthly compensation, she is informed that she may withdraw the remaining appeals, wholly or in part, by submitted a statement to that effect bearing her signature, or by instructing her representative to withdraw the appeal on her behalf. Governing law and regulation provide that when evidence requested in connection with an original claim or a claim for increase is not furnished within one year after the date of the request, the claim will be considered abandoned. 38 C.F.R. §3.158. To all appearances, it does appear that the Veteran has abandoned her appeal and these claims by ignoring the VA for a period of more than six years. However, in light of the evidence that she has relocated since the September 2012 VA examination, and the reasonable speculation on the part of the Veteran’s representative that she likely did not receive much of the correspondence mailed to her, the Board deems that another effort to revive this appeal must be undertaken. Even though the Veteran has failed to stay in contact with VA regarding her appeal, she does maintain a relationship with VA in that she receives medical care from VA and she continues to receive VA benefits. Therefore, the Board deems that all avenues for contacting the Veteran have not been exhausted. Upon remand, therefore, the VA should check with the financial institution which receives her monthly VA benefit deposits to ascertain whether that institution has a current address for her. Additionally, the VA should request information regarding her current address from the Veteran’s VA Medical Administration file, in the event that she has kept the VA Medical System apprised of her current address. In this regard, we observe that she was hospitalized at a VA medical facility in Durham, North Carolina in the year 2018. After identifying a current address for the Veteran, VA should ascertain whether she indeed desires to continue with her appeal. If so, she should be provided with copies of the correspondence mandated in the prior Board remand, to include the evidentiary development letters mailed to her pursuant to the 2011 Board remand, and the December 2013 Statement of the Case prepared following the Board’s remand. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Check with the financial institution which receives the Veteran’s monthly VA benefit deposits to ascertain whether that institution has a current address for her. 2. Request information regarding the Veteran’s current address from the Veteran’s VA Medical Administration file. In this regard, it should be noted that she was hospitalized at a VA medical facility in Durham, North Carolina in 2018. 3. After identifying a current address for the Veteran, ascertain whether she desires to continue with her appeal. This contact with the Veteran should be fully documented for further appellate review. She and her representative should be fully informed that failure to affirmatively state she wishes to continue the appeal will result in a determination she has abandoned the appeal. 4. If the Veteran does affirmatively wish to continue this appeal, provide her with copies of the correspondence mandated in the prior Board remand, to include the evidentiary development letters mailed to her pursuant to the 2011 Board remand, and the December 2013 Statement of the Case prepared following the Board’s remand. Reasonable time limits for her response should be provided, and she should be clearly informed that failure to comply with these time limits will result in a declaration that she has abandoned her appeal. 5. If the Veteran does affirmatively wish to continue this appeal, then VA should continue to develop the evidence to support her appeal, as outlined in the prior Board remand, and then accomplish any other evidentiary development which may become apparent, prior to re-adjudicating the claims on appeal. T. WISHARD Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Heather J. Harter