Citation Nr: 20011348
Decision Date: 02/11/20	Archive Date: 02/11/20

DOCKET NO. 19-28 206
DATE: February 11, 2020

REMANDED

Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for onychomycosis (toenail fungus) is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served honorably on active duty in the United States Army from June 1971 to February 1974.

This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2018 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office.

Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for onychomycosis is remanded.

The Veteran was last examined for purposes of assessing the severity of his onychomycosis in July 2019.  In December 2019, he submitted private medical records reflecting follow-up for nail surgery, indicating a possible worsening of his condition.  Under the circumstances, a new examination is warranted.  See, e.g., Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400, 403 (1997). 

This matter is REMANDED for the following action:

1. Ask the Veteran to identify, and provide appropriate releases for, any care providers who may possess new or additional evidence pertinent to the issue on appeal.  If he provides the necessary release(s), assist him in obtaining the records identified, following the procedures set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159.  Any new or additional (i.e., non-duplicative) evidence received should be associated with the record.  If any of the records sought are not available, the record should be annotated to reflect that fact and the Veteran, and his representative should be notified. 

2. Obtain copies of records pertaining to any VA treatment the Veteran has received since the time that such records were last procured, following the procedures set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159.  The evidence obtained, if any, should be associated with the record.

3. After the foregoing development has been completed, arrange to have the Veteran scheduled for a VA examination for purposes of assessing the current severity of his onychomycosis.  The examiner should provide a full description of the Veteran’s associated functional impairments. 

4. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraph, the issue on appeal should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence.  If the benefit sought remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be issued a supplemental statement  

of the case.  An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. 

 

 

DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	R. Gandhi, 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.