Citation Nr: 20003872 Decision Date: 01/16/20 Archive Date: 01/15/20 DOCKET NO. 17-13 341 DATE: January 16, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to a compensable disability rating for dry skin on hands is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for scars is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for dermatitis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND In February 2019, the Board remanded the case to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for the Veteran to receive VA examinations for his increased rating and service connection claims. The Veteran received new VA examinations for his disabilities in March 2019. However, the Board finds that there has not been substantial compliance with the remand directives. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 1. Dry Skin on Hands The March 2019 examiner stated the Veteran had no skin condition present on examination and noted he had not been treated for any skin condition within the past year. The Veteran’s records, however, show that he was being treated for dry skin and taking medication. His VA treatment records also document his recent treatment for dry skin. Accordingly, a new VA examination is necessary to accurately reflect the severity of the Veteran’s disability. Additionally, in an October 2019 statement the Veteran noted he was seeking treatment privately for his skin issues. Thus, a remand is required to allow VA to obtain authorization and request these records. 2. Scars and Dermatitis The March 2019 examiner did not provide a nexus opinion concerning the Veteran’s scar and dermatitis service connection claims because, as noted above, the examiner found there was no skin conditions present. The Board finds the VA examiner did not fully consider the medical evidence of record that showed the evidence of a current disability during the appeal period. The April 2015 VA examiner noted that the Veteran had 2 painful/unstable scars in his beard area. At the time, he also had seborrheic dermatitis. The requirement of a current disability is “satisfied when a claimant has a disability at the time a claim for VA disability compensation is filed or during the pendency of that claim.” See McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007). The standard is whether a disability exists at the time the claim was filed. See Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 293 (2013). Therefore, the Board finds a new VA examination is necessary. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142 for the Veteran’s private dermatologist. If he provides the necessary information, make two requests for the authorized records from the Veteran’s doctor, unless it is clear after the first request that a second request would be futile. Negative replies should be documented. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination with an appropriate clinician to determine the current severity of his dry skin. The entire claims file and a copy of this remand must be made available to the examiner for review, and the examiner must specifically acknowledge receipt and review of these materials in any reports generated. The examiner must provide all findings, along with a complete rationale for any opinions provided. 3. Schedule the Veteran for an examination with an appropriate clinician for his skin conditions, to include scars, dermatitis, basal cell carcinoma, apocrine hidrocystoma, or any other skin disorder found to be present. The entire claims file and a copy of this remand must be made available to the examiner for review, and the examiner must specifically acknowledge receipt and review of these materials in any reports generated. The examiner must provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s skin condition began during active service or is related to an incident of service. Although an independent review of the claims file is required, the examiner should specifically consider the Veteran’s complaints of dry skin in service, the Veteran’s report of extreme sunburn in service, the April 2015 DBQ, and the multiple lay statements of record documenting the Veteran’s skin issues since service. The examiner must provide all findings, along with a complete rationale for his or her opinion(s) in the examination report. If any of the above requested opinions cannot be made without resort to speculation, the examiner must state this and provide a rationale for such conclusion. (continued on next page)   3. Then, readjudicate the claims. If any decision is unfavorable to the Veteran, issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case and allow the applicable time for response. Then return the case to the Board. D. Martz Ames Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Brunot, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.