Citation Nr: 20007526 Decision Date: 01/29/20 Archive Date: 01/29/20 DOCKET NO. 14-04 136 DATE: January 29, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II (DMII), to include as due to herbicide exposure, is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for service-connected residuals fracture of left femur with 1-inch shortening and lateral bowing is remanded Entitlement to total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities is remanded. . REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from July 1967 to July 1970 and from March 1972 to April 1980. The appeal was most recently before the Board in October 2019 when it was remanded for further development. 1. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II (DMII), to include as due to herbicide exposure, is remanded. 2. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for service-connected residuals fracture of left femur with 1-inch shortening and lateral bowing is remanded. 3. Entitlement TDIU is remanded. The appeal must be remanded again because the development requested in the October 2019 Board remand has not been completed and the case was returned to the Board prematurely. The record includes additional evidence obtained as part of the development, including a December 2019 VA examination, service treatment records, and military personnel records. However, there is no Supplemental Statement of the Case informing the Veteran of the development undertaken. 38 C.F.R. § 19.31(c). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: The AOJ should review the development undertaken since the October 2019 remand and undertake any other indicated development. Thereafter, the Veteran and representative must be furnished with a SSOC. M.E. Larkin Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Jones Council 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 This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.