Citation Nr: 20079906 Decision Date: 12/17/20 Archive Date: 12/17/20 DOCKET NO. 16-30 374 DATE: December 17, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is remanded. Entitlement to burial benefits is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from March 9, 1943 to September 20, 1943. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In July 2019, the Board remanded this matter for further development, to include for the issuance of a statement of the case (SOC) addressing the burial benefits claim. However, the RO did not issue a SOC regarding these issues. Rather, in August 2020, the RO issued a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) addressing these issues, stating no further action was required to continue the appeal. As the appellant has been led to believe by the RO that these issues were on appeal to the Board and did not advise her any further action was needed on her part to perfect her appeal, the Board will accept jurisdiction. See Percy v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 37 (2009). 1. Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is remanded. Unfortunately, another remand is required in this case. Although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, a remand is warranted where there was not substantial compliance with the prior Board’s remand order. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998) (a remand confers upon the claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand directives); Dyment v. West, 13 Vet. App. 141, 146-47 (1999) (noting that Stegall requires substantial compliance with remand orders, rather than absolute compliance). Additional development is necessary to ensure the Board is able to make an informed decision and that the claim is afforded every possible consideration. Evidence submitted by the appellant includes an October 1943 War Department (WD) report. This report reflects that under the provisions of WD Circular 161, discharges are granted from service because of physical or mental defects under three sections of AR 615-360 – section II, section VIII, and section X. In particular, section II discharges are granted to enlisted men upon order of a certificate of disability for discharge (WD, AGO Form 40) which certifies that the enlisted man has become unfit for military service because of physical disability. Under the provisions of WD Circular 161, July 14, 1943 and The Adjutant General’s Office Memorandum No. W615-64-43, section II discharges may also be granted to enlisted men initially classified as limited service who have acquired defects while in service or whose existing defects have been aggravated by military service if they do not meet current mental and physical induction standards. See Military Personnel Records, received January 17, 2020. The Board notes that the Veteran’s active duty service lasted for just over six months and a notation listed on his “Enlisted Records” indicates he was honorably discharged “by reason of Cir. 161.WD/43.AR615-360.CDD 3rd Ind. Hqs 8SC, Dallas, Texas.” In this regard, the July 2019 Board remand, in pertinent part, directed the RO to obtain an explanation or translation of the reason for the Veteran’s honorable discharge. A December 2019 request for information sought an explanation or translation of this notation. See December 2019 VA 21-3101. Despite this request, no answer was received. 2. Entitlement to burial benefits is remanded. Since the burial benefits claim is inextricably intertwined with the remaining claims, it is also being remanded. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991) (two issues are “inextricably intertwined” when they are so closely tied together that a final decision on one issue cannot be rendered until a decision on the other issue has been rendered); Ephraim v. Brown, 82 F.3d 399 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (claims are inextricably intertwined when they have common parameters, such as when the outcome of one may affect the outcome of the other. And to avoid piecemeal adjudication of these types of claims, they should be considered together). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Contact any appropriate source, to include the National Personnel Records Center, the Department of the Army, etc., to request an explanation or translation of the notation listed on the Veteran’s Enlisted Record, indicating that he was honorably discharged “by reason of Cir. 161.WD/43.AR615-360.CDD 3rd Ind. Hqs 8SC, Dallas, Texas.” (Continued on the next page)   If the Veteran was granted a section II (disability discharge) under AR 615-360, the source should be asked to identify the specific disability, if possible. P.M. DILORENZO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. M. Stedman, 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.