Citation Nr: 20026086 Decision Date: 04/15/20 Archive Date: 04/15/20 DOCKET NO. 18-42 624 DATE: April 15, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for right-sided facial scars is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had honorable service in the United States Army from September 1961 to September 1964. The Veteran was afforded a videoconference hearing before the undersigned in January 2020, and a transcript has been associated with the record. See January 24, 2020, Hearing Transcript. 1. Entitlement to service connection for right-sided facial scars is remanded. The Veteran claimed entitlement to service connection for right sided facial scars. See November 2017, VA 21-0966 Intent to File; December 2017, VA 21-526EZ, Fully Developed Claim (Compensation). The Veteran has explained that he was stationed in South Korea at the time of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, November 22, 1963, and the base went on lock-down as a result. See January 24, 2020, Hearing Transcript; see December 2017, Correspondence. He reported that he was placed on guard duty to patrol the base and apprehended an individual who had slipped onto the base to steal a compressor. The Veteran reports that the individual cut his face with the same tool he had used to cut through the fence. See January 24, 2020, Hearing Transcript. The Veteran was treated by a medic who used the equivalent of Steri-Strips on the wound. The Veteran reported that he was quarantined for two weeks while the wound healed in order to prevent infection. The Veteran explained that he did not seek service connection for the right-sided facial scar until, in the course of seeking information regarding his claim for service connection for his knee, a veterans’ service officer advised him to also seek to have his scar service connected. He explained that he had not realized that he could claim service connection for a disability such as a scar. VA treatment records show that indeed the Veteran has scarring of the face. See June 2017, Medical Treatment Record- Government Facility. There is no VA examination of record pertaining to facial scarring. The Veteran has reported that in the course of apprehending an individual, he was injured when that individual cut him with the same tool he had used to cut through the fence. The Veteran is competent to report that such an event took place. The Board finds that remand for a VA opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran’s facial scar is necessary. See McClendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). Specifically, the Board requires a VA examiner to opine whether it is at least as likely as not, considering the current scar tissue involved that the Veteran’s facial scarring is the type of disability that is consistent with the type of laceration injury and healing history that the Veteran has described. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Provide an ACE examination, or if the examiner deems it necessary, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any right-sided facial scarring. The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s right-sided facial scarring is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including the Veteran’s reported in-service laceration to the face. The examiner should specifically opine whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s right-sided facial scarring is of the type that could result from a laceration injury as described by the Veteran. The examiner need not determine the Veteran’s credibility as to his reports of the injury, but only consider whether the scarring is of a type consistent with the injury. The examiner should ask the Veteran any questions necessary to determine the extent of the injury reported in service. YVETTE R. WHITE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Barner, 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.