Citation Nr: 20021355 Decision Date: 03/25/20 Archive Date: 03/25/20 DOCKET NO. 11-33 836 DATE: March 25, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to a compensable initial compensable rating for service-connected fracture of left fifth finger is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1985 to September 1989 in the United States Army. This case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of a November 2010 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In August 2016 and February 2018, the Board remanded the case for further development. Entitlement to a compensable initial compensable rating for service-connected fracture of left fifth finger is remanded. In February 2018, the Board remanded the matter so the Veteran could be afforded a new VA examination to assess his service-connected left fifth finger. The Veteran was scheduled for a January 7, 2020 VA examination for his left fifth finger. The Veteran failed to report to the examination. A remand by the Board confers on a Veteran, as a matter of law, a right to compliance with the remand instructions, and imposes upon VA a concomitant duty to ensure compliance with the terms of the remand. If the Board proceeds with final disposition of an appeal, and the remand orders have not been complied with, the Board itself errs in failing to ensure compliance. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Once VA undertakes the effort to provide a medical examination or opinion, it must provide an adequate one. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311-12 (2007). The February 2018 Board remand reflects that the evidence of record was inadequate to decide the appeal, to include the July 2017 VA examination report. It was noted that there were complaints of occasional left-hand numbness, but that no neurological testing/exam had been conducted and that the opinion did not address the question of whether there were any neurological manifestations of the service connected left fifth finger disability. The February 2018 Board decision found that the examination obtained upon remand was inadequate. Barr; supra; Stegall, supra. The record shows that the Veteran failed to report for the examination scheduled pursuant to the Board’s February 2018 remand. However, Veteran’s claim file contains no documentation in the record showing that he was notified as to the date, place, and time of the examination, which raises due process concerns. Given the above, remand is necessary to have the RO associate with the record a copy of the notice letter of the missed VA examination or, alternatively, to reschedule the examination. The record shows that the Veteran has had a pattern of failing to report to appointments including a Board hearing and several VA medical examinations. VA’s duty to assist is not a one-way street. See Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991). The Veteran shoulder report for all scheduled VA examinations and to cooperate in the development of his claim. The consequences for failure to report for a VA examination without good cause may include denial of the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.655. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Associate with the record a copy of the notice letter of the missed January 2020 VA examination or, alternatively, reschedule the examination and include a copy of that notice letter showing the date, place, and time of the examination sent to the Veteran’s last known address. 2. ONLY if a copy of the notice letter of the missed scheduled examination is not found and associated with the record, then obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records for the period from December 2019 to the Present. 3. ONLY if a copy of the notice letter of the missed scheduled examination is not found and associated with the record, then provide a new examination by an appropriate medical professional to assess the current nature and severity of residuals of a fracture of the left fifth finger. Any indicated tests or studies should be completed. (a.) Based on review of the record, an interview with the Veteran, and an examination, the examiner should identify the nature and severity of all symptoms (and related impairment of function) associated with the Veteran’s service-connected left fifth finger. (b.) The examiner should elicit the Veteran’s subjective complaints, report all clinical findings in detail, and reconcile the subjective complaints with the objective findings, commenting on the resulting functional impairment. (c.) The examiner must specifically comment on the significance of the Veteran’s report of numbness associated with the left fifth finger disability, and whether there are objective neurological findings associated with that disability. C.A. SKOW Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. A. Macek, 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.