Citation Nr: 18155630 Decision Date: 12/04/18 Archive Date: 12/04/18 DOCKET NO. 16-57 510 DATE: December 4, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to a compensable rating for plantar wart of the right foot not in excess of 10 percent is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a sinus condition is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a skin condition is remanded. Entitlement to special monthly compensation based on aid and attendance is remanded. Entitlement to temporary total evaluation based on convalescence is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s plantar wart of the right foot presents at least two painful scars. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for a compensable rating for plantar wart of the right foot not in excess of 10 percent have been met. 38 C.F.R. § 4.118, Diagnostic Code 7804, 7805. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1974 to August 1978. The Veteran appeals February 2015 and November 2015 rating decisions from the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Louisville, Kentucky. The Veteran did not request a Board hearing in his November 2016 VA Form 9. Increased Rating The Veteran asserts that he is warranted a compensable rating for his plantar wart of the right foot. Disability evaluations are determined by comparing the Veteran’s present symptomatology with the criteria set forth in the VA’s Schedule for Rating Disabilities. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § Part 4. Higher ratings are assigned if the disability more nearly approximates the criteria for that rating; otherwise, the lower rating is assigned. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence, the benefit of the doubt is to be resolved in the Veteran’s favor. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b). The Board will consider whether separate ratings may be assigned for separate periods of time based on facts found, a practice known as “staged ratings,” whether it is an initial rating case or not. Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119, 126-27 (1999); Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007). Entitlement to a compensable rating for plantar wart of the right foot The Veteran contends that the severity of this plantar wart of the right foot warrants a compensable rating. The Board notes that the criteria for the skin were revised, effective August 13, 2018. Claims pending prior to the effective date will be considered under both old and new rating criteria, and whatever criteria is more favorable to the Veteran will be applied. See Schedule for Rating Disabilities: Skin, 83 Fed. Reg. 32592 (July 13, 2018) (to be codified at 38 C.F.R. 4). Under the amended Diagnostic Code 7805, other scars evaluated under, and other effects of scars are evaluated under diagnostic codes 7800, 7801, 7802, or 7804. According to Diagnostic Code 7804, which was not revised by the above-mentioned regulation, a 10 percent rating is assignable for one or two scars that are unstable or painful. A 20 percent rating is assignable for three or four scars that are unstable or painful. A 30 percent rating is assignable for five or more scars that are unstable and painful. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in February 2015. The VA examiner noted that Veteran has a callus on the plantar surface of the right foot located over the second/third metatarsal head. The VA examiner noted that the scar does not cause scarring or disfigurement of the Veteran’s head, face, or neck. Further, the Veteran’s scar does not present any benign or malignant melanoma, nor any systemic manifestations due to any skin diseases. The Veteran stated that he uses a topical treatment using urea topical cream for a six-week period, but such treatment is not constant. The VA examiner noted that the Veteran’s scar does not present debilitating episodes. The VA examiner opined that, “There are no objective signs of pain on examination, but [the Veteran] has subjective complaint of tenderness to palpation of this callus.” The VA examiner noted that the Veteran’s scar presented no functional impact. A March 2015 private physician noted that the Veteran’s right foot had a painful lesion near the third metatarsal. The same physician confirmed the painful lesion in undated correspondence attached to the Veteran’s November 2016 VA Form 9. A May 2018 private physician noted the presence of a painful hyperkeratotic lesion on the right third toe. Based on the above, the Board finds that a compensable rating not in excess of 10 percent is warranted. According to the Veteran’s private physician, the Veteran has at least two painful lesions on his right foot. As such, the Veteran is warranted a 10 percent rating for his plantar wart of the right foot. A rating in excess of 10 percent is not warranted because the evidence of record is silent as to whether the Veteran has three to four painful scars. The February 2015 VA examiner that the scar does not cause scarring or disfigurement of the Veteran’s head, face, or neck. As such, a higher rating under Diagnostic Code 7800 is not warranted. Further, the evidence of record is silent as to whether the Veteran’s scar is associated with underlying soft tissue damage, or is superficial, as such, the Veteran is not warranted a higher rating under Diagnostic Codes 7801, or 7802. REASONS FOR REMAND Entitlement to service connection for a sinus condition Entitlement to service connection for a skin condition Entitlement to special monthly compensation based on aid and attendance Entitlement to temporary total evaluation based on convalescence The Veteran is seeking entitlement to service connection for sinus and skin conditions, special monthly compensation based on aid and attendance, and a temporary total evaluation based on convalescence. The RO denied service connection for these claims in February 2015 and November 2015 rating decisions. In February 2016, the Veteran filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) contesting those decisions. As it does not appear that the RO has taken any further action regarding those claims, or acknowledged the Veteran’s NOD, these claims must be remanded for issuance of a statement of the case (SOC). See 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.9, 20.200, 20.201; Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should issue a statement of the case addressing the issues of entitlement to service connection for sinus and skin conditions, special monthly compensation based on aid and attendance, and a temporary total evaluation based on convalescence. Thereafter, the Veteran should be given an opportunity to perfect an appeal by submitting a timely substantive appeal. The AOJ should advise the Veteran that the appeal will not be returned to the Board for appellate consideration following the issuance of the SOC unless he perfects his appeal. JOHN J CROWLEY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Timothy A. Campbell, Associate Counsel